Cited by 195Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare

Explainable artificial intelligence in Alzheimer’s disease classification: a systematic review

Open access
Viswan, Vimbi, Shaffi, Noushath, Mahmud, Mufti, Subramanian, Karthikeyan, Hajamohideen, Faizal·2024·Cognitive Computation

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

The unprecedented growth of computational capabilities in recent years has allowed Artificial Intelligence (AI) models to be developed for medical applications with remarkable results. However, a large number of Computer Aided Diagnosis (CAD) methods powered by AI have limited acceptance and adoption in the medical domain due to the typical blackbox nature of these AI models. Therefore, to facilitate the adoption of these AI models among the medical practitioners, the models' predictions must be explainable and interpretable. The emerging field of explainable AI (XAI) aims to justify the trustworthiness of these models' predictions. This work presents a systematic review of the literature reporting Alzheimer's disease (AD) detection using XAI that were communicated during the last decade. Research questions were carefully formulated to categorise AI models into different conceptual approaches (e.g., Post-hoc, Ante-hoc, Model-Agnostic, Model-Specific, Global, Local etc.) and frameworks (Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanation or LIME, SHapley Additive exPlanations or SHAP, Gradient-weighted Class Activation Mapping or GradCAM, Layer-wise Relevance Propagation or LRP, etc.) of XAI. This categorisation provides broad coverage of the interpretation spectrum from intrinsic (e.g., Model-Specific, Ante-hoc models) to complex patterns (e.g., Model-Agnostic, Post-hoc models) and by taking local explanations to a global scope. Additionally, different forms of interpretations providing in-depth insight into the factors that support the clinical diagnosis of AD are also discussed. Finally, limitations, needs and open challenges of XAI research are outlined with possible prospects of their usage in AD detection.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s12559-023-10192-x

Cites

161 of 161 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

23 of the 184 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Viswan, V., Shaffi, N., Mahmud, M., Subramanian, K., & Hajamohideen, F.
Affiliations
  • University of Technology and Applied Sciences-Suhar (OM)
  • Nottingham Trent University (GB)
Corresponding author
Mahmud, Mufti
Venue
Cognitive Computation
Published
2023-11-13
Volume
16
Issue
1
Pages
1-44
ISSN
  • 1866-9956 (ISSN-L)
  • 1866-9964
OpenAlex
W4388634755
Cited by
195
References
184
Citations by year
2026: 63 · 2025: 80 · 2024: 49 · 2023: 3
FWCI
4.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cognitive Computation (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Ministry of Higher Education, Government of Oman (MoHERI/BFP/UoTAS/01/2021)
  • Nottingham Trent University (Strategic Research Theme Award, 2022)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Keywords
explainable AI, Alzheimer's disease detection, computer-aided diagnosis, model interpretability, post-hoc explanation, model-agnostic explanation, local and global explanations, lime, SHAP, Grad-CAM, layer-wise relevance propagation, diagnosis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review