Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42288602›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

Decision processes in 3D structural MRI schizophrenia classification evaluated with saliency maps.

Julia Jelitzki, Alexandra Reichenbach, Alexander Windberger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Julia JelitzkiCenter for Machine Learning, Heilbronn University, Heilbronn, Germany.
Alexandra Reichenbach *Center for Machine Learning, Heilbronn University, Heilbronn, Germany. alexandra.reichenbach@hs-heilbronn.de.
Alexander Windberger *Faculty of Informatics, Heilbronn University, Heilbronn, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical decision support systems for psychiatric disorders such as schizophrenia can benefit from machine learning models based on neuroimaging data for objective diagnosis, prognosis, and effective treatment selection. Deep learning (DL) models promise to be suitable for this task since they can detect complex patterns in images without the need for prior information about candidate regions. Their downside, however, is the lack of transparency about the decision process. Explainable AI methods address this problem and might be helpful in the clinical translation of DL applications as well as potential biomarker indication. The current study qualitatively and quantitatively evaluates seven DL architectures frequently employed in medical image analyses with gradient-weighted class activation mapping (Grad-CAM) for plausibility and finds that only two of the seven models base their decisions in a schizophrenia classification task on plausible structural brain information, despite similar classification performance. Furthermore, we develop an approach to translate the saliency maps from the Grad-CAM into universally interpretable anatomical markers of schizophrenia and find candidate regions corresponding to known markers of schizophrenia. To conclude, this study demonstrates the necessity of using explainable methods alongside DL approaches and the feasibility to derive biomarkers with such methods.

Indexed as

BrainImaging, Three-DimensionalMagnetic Resonance ImagingSchizophreniaDeep LearningHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedNeuroimagingDeep learningExplainable AIGrad-CAMSaliency mapSchizophreniaStructural magnetic resonance imaging

Identifiers

PMID42288602
PMCPMC13264623

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.