ArticleFrontiers in immunology2026
ISPAD, bridging clinical expertise and AI for autoimmune-related pernicious anemia diagnosis.
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Pernicious anemia (PA) is a severe clinical consequence of autoimmune gastritis. It results from immune-mediated damage to gastric parietal cells in the oxyntic mucosa. This process leads to intrinsic factor deficiency and subsequent vitamin B Methods: To address the intrinsic diagnostic uncertainty of PA-arising from heterogeneous, graded, and often discordant clinical, histological, immunological, and biochemical information-we developed ISPAD (Intelligent System for Pernicious Anemia Diagnosis), an explainable AI-based probabilistic framework to integrate this information, producing a probability estimate of pernicious anemia that reflects clinical reasoning rather than rigid diagnostic thresholds. Results: ISPAD was examined using a series of published diagnostically challenging cases reflecting real-world complexity. These cases included antibody assay interference, hemolysis-masked macrocytosis, seronegative presentations, and cancer-associated atrophy. Across cases, the system generated a continuous and adaptable probabilistic assessment of pernicious anemia. This assessment relied on dynamic, context-dependent integration of available information and illustrated the potential for formalizing complex diagnostic reasoning. Conclusion: ISPAD illustrates how explainable artificial intelligence can formalize expert reasoning in autoimmune-related pernicious anemia. By integrating heterogeneous and often discordant information into a transparent probabilistic framework, this proof-of-concept approach provides a structured approach to diagnostic reasoning, particularly in complex or atypical situations.
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.