An Empirical Comparison of Explainable Artificial Intelligence Methods for Clinical Data: A Case Study on Traumatic Brain Injury

Abstract

A longstanding challenge surrounding deep learning algorithms is unpacking and understanding how they make their decisions. Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) offers methods to provide explanations of internal functions of algorithms and reasons behind their decisions in ways that are interpretable and understandable to human users. . Numerous XAI approaches have been developed thus far, and a comparative analysis of these strategies seems necessary to discern their relevance to clinical prediction models. To this end, we first implemented two prediction models for short- and long-term outcomes of traumatic brain injury (TBI) utilizing structured tabular as well as time-series physiologic data, respectively. Six different interpretation techniques were used to describe both prediction models at the local and global levels. We then performed a critical analysis of merits and drawbacks of each strategy, highlighting the implications for researchers who are interested in applying these methodologies. The implemented methods were compared to one another in terms of several XAI characteristics such as understandability, fidelity, and stability. Our findings show that SHAP is the most stable with the highest fidelity but falls short of understandability. Anchors, on the other hand, is the most understandable approach, but it is only applicable to tabular data and not time series data.