How does the model make predictions? A systematic literature review on the explainability power of machine learning in healthcare

被引:42
|
作者
Allgaier, Johannes [1 ]
Mulansky, Lena [1 ]
Draelos, Rachel Lea [2 ]
Pryss, Ruediger [1 ]
机构
[1] Julius Maximilians Univ Wurzburg JMU, Inst Clin Epidemiol & Biometry, Wurzburg, Germany
[2] Cydoc, Durham, NC USA
关键词
Explainable artificial intelligence; XAI; Interpretable machine learning; PRISMA; Medicine; Healthcare; Review; ARTIFICIAL-INTELLIGENCE; SKIN-CANCER; BLACK-BOX; EXPLANATIONS;
D O I
10.1016/j.artmed.2023.102616
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
Background: Medical use cases for machine learning (ML) are growing exponentially. The first hospitals are already using ML systems as decision support systems in their daily routine. At the same time, most ML systems are still opaque and it is not clear how these systems arrive at their predictions.Methods: In this paper, we provide a brief overview of the taxonomy of explainability methods and review popular methods. In addition, we conduct a systematic literature search on PubMed to investigate which explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) methods are used in 450 specific medical supervised ML use cases, how the use of XAI methods has emerged recently, and how the precision of describing ML pipelines has evolved over the past 20 years.Results: A large fraction of publications with ML use cases do not use XAI methods at all to explain ML pre-dictions. However, when XAI methods are used, open-source and model-agnostic explanation methods are more commonly used, with SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) and Gradient Class Activation Mapping (Grad -CAM) for tabular and image data leading the way. ML pipelines have been described in increasing detail and uniformity in recent years. However, the willingness to share data and code has stagnated at about one-quarter.Conclusions: XAI methods are mainly used when their application requires little effort. The homogenization of reports in ML use cases facilitates the comparability of work and should be advanced in the coming years. Experts who can mediate between the worlds of informatics and medicine will become more and more in demand when using ML systems due to the high complexity of the domain.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Machine learning in burn care and research: A systematic review of the literature
    Liu, Nehemiah T.
    Salinas, Jose
    BURNS, 2015, 41 (08) : 1636 - 1641
  • [42] A Systematic Literature Review on Distributed Machine Learning in Edge Computing
    Poncinelli Filho, Carlos
    Marques Jr, Elias
    Chang, Victor
    dos Santos, Leonardo
    Bernardini, Flavia
    Pires, Paulo F.
    Ochi, Luiz
    Delicato, Flavia C.
    SENSORS, 2022, 22 (07)
  • [43] Machine Learning applied to credit analysis: a Systematic Literature Review
    Pincovsky, Mariana
    Falcao, Adriana
    Nunes, Waelson N.
    Furtado, Ana Paula
    Cunha, Rodrigo C. L., V
    PROCEEDINGS OF 2021 16TH IBERIAN CONFERENCE ON INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND TECHNOLOGIES (CISTI'2021), 2021,
  • [44] Conceptual Modeling Interacts with Machine Learning - A Systematic Literature Review
    Zaidi, Moayid Ali
    COMPUTATIONAL SCIENCE AND ITS APPLICATIONS, ICCSA 2021, PT IX, 2021, 12957 : 522 - 532
  • [45] Application of machine learning in dementia diagnosis: A systematic literature review
    Kantayeva, Gauhar
    Lima, Jose
    Pereira, Ana I.
    HELIYON, 2023, 9 (11)
  • [46] Use of machine learning in osteoarthritis research: a systematic literature review
    Binvignat, Marie
    Pedoia, Valentina
    Butte, Atul J.
    Louati, Karine
    Klatzmann, David
    Berenbaum, Francis
    Mariotti-Ferrandiz, Encarnita
    Sellam, Jeremie
    RMD OPEN, 2022, 8 (01):
  • [47] Machine learning in business process management: A systematic literature review
    Weinzierl, Sven
    Zilker, Sandra
    Dunzer, Sebastian
    Matzner, Martin
    EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS, 2024, 253
  • [48] Forecasting drought using machine learning: a systematic literature review
    Oyarzabal, Ricardo S.
    Santos, Leonardo B. L.
    Cunningham, Christopher
    Broedel, Elisangela
    de Lima, Glauston R. T.
    Cunha-Zeri, Gisleine
    Peixoto, Jerusa S.
    Anochi, Juliana A.
    Garcia, Klaifer
    Costa, Lidiane C. O.
    Pampuch, Luana A.
    Cuartas, Luz Adriana
    Zeri, Marcelo
    Guedes, Marcia R. G.
    Negri, Rogerio G.
    Munoz, Viviana A.
    Cunha, Ana Paula M. A.
    NATURAL HAZARDS, 2025,
  • [49] Preeclampsia prediction via machine learning: a systematic literature review
    Ozcan, Mert
    Peker, Serhat
    HEALTH SYSTEMS, 2024,
  • [50] Knowledge transfer in lifelong machine learning: a systematic literature review
    Khodaee, Pouya
    Viktor, Herna L.
    Michalowski, Wojtek
    ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE REVIEW, 2024, 57 (08)