ReviewScientific reports2025
Trustworthy deep learning for malaria diagnosis using explainable artificial intelligence.
Review in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- AI-Enhanced Point-of-Care Diagnostics for Infectious Diseases in Resource-Limited Settings: A Scoping Review.Tropical medicine & international health : TM & IH · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Malaria remains a major global health concern, particularly in regions with limited healthcare infrastructure. Traditional diagnostic methods such as microscopy, rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs), and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) suffer from scalability, sensitivity, and expertise-related limitations, underscoring the need for automated diagnostic strategies. This study investigates deep learning models for malaria detection from blood smear images. Four convolutional neural networks (CNNs), MobileNetV2, VGG19, InceptionV3, and ResNet18, were empirically evaluated, with ResNet18 achieving the highest F1-score of 96.33%. Building on these results, two advanced hybrid architectures, Xception and Inception-ResNetV2, were fine-tuned on a dataset of 27,090 images from the Kaggle malaria collection, attaining classification accuracies of approximately 98% on validation and test sets. Model robustness was further confirmed using an independent dataset from the Harvard Dataverse containing thick smear images captured under varied staining and imaging conditions, where accuracy remained consistently high (97-98%). To enhance interpretability and clinical trust, three explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) techniques, Gradient-weighted Class Activation Mapping (Grad-CAM), Local Interpretable Model-agnostic Explanations (LIME), and SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP), were employed. These complementary methods provide spatial, superpixel, and pixel-level transparency into the models' decision-making. Furthermore, representative misdiagnosed samples are presented, wherein these visualization techniques reveal morphological and staining artifacts that led to erroneous predictions, clarifying model failure modes and improving transparency. The proposed AI-based diagnostic framework thus demonstrates high accuracy, interpretability, and generalization, representing a scalable solution for malaria detection in resource-limited healthcare settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.