Cited by 44Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)Artificial Intelligence in HealthcareMachine Learning in Healthcare

Towards Transparent Diabetes Prediction: Combining AutoML and Explainable AI for Improved Clinical Insights

Open access
Hasan, Raza, Dattana, Vishal, Mahmood, Salman, Hussain, Saqib·2024·Information

Abstract

Diabetes is a global health challenge that requires early detection for effective management. This study integrates Automated Machine Learning (AutoML) with Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) to improve diabetes risk prediction and enhance model interpretability for healthcare professionals. Using the Pima Indian Diabetes dataset, we developed an ensemble model with 85.01% accuracy leveraging AutoGluon’s AutoML framework. To address the “black-box” nature of machine learning, we applied XAI techniques, including SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP), Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanations (LIME), Integrated Gradients (IG), Attention Mechanism (AM), and Counterfactual Analysis (CA), providing both global and patient-specific insights into critical risk factors such as glucose and BMI. These methods enable transparent and actionable predictions, supporting clinical decision-making. An interactive Streamlit application was developed to allow clinicians to explore feature importance and test hypothetical scenarios. Cross-validation confirmed the model’s robust performance across diverse datasets. This study demonstrates the integration of AutoML with XAI as a pathway to achieving accurate, interpretable models that foster transparency and trust while supporting actionable clinical decisions.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/info16010007

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Hasan, R., Dattana, V., Mahmood, S., & Hussain, S.
Affiliations
  • Southampton Solent University (GB)
  • Digital Transformation, Oman College of Management & Technology, P.O. Box 680, Barka 320, Oman
  • Department of Computer Science, Nazeer Hussain University, ST-2, near Karimabad, Karachi 75950, Pakistan
  • Northumbria University (GB)
Corresponding author
Hasan, Raza
Venue
Information
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2024-12-26
Volume
16
Issue
1
Pages
7
ISSN
2078-2489 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4405810319
Cited by
44
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 29 · 2025: 15
FWCI
5.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Information (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Solent University Research Portal (Solent University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
Keywords
diabetes risk prediction, automated machine learning, explainable AI, Pima Indians diabetes dataset, SHAP, lime, integrated gradients, attention mechanism, counterfactual analysis, ensemble learning, AutoGluon, clinical decision support, feature importance, Streamlit web application

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