Sümer Ömer, Huber Tobias, Duong Dat, Ledgister Hanchard Suzanna E, Conati Cristina, André Elisabeth, Solomon Benjamin D, Waikel Rebekah L
Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence, University of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.
Technische Hochschule Ingolstadt, Ingolstadt, Germany.
medRxiv. 2025 Jun 9:2025.06.08.25328588. doi: 10.1101/2025.06.08.25328588.
Artificial intelligence (AI) tools are increasingly employed in clinical genetics to assist in diagnosing genetic conditions by assessing photographs of patients. For medical uses of AI, explainable AI (XAI) methods offer a promising approach by providing interpretable outputs, such as saliency maps and region relevance visualizations. XAI has been discussed as important for regulatory purposes and to enable clinicians to better understand how AI tools work in practice. However, the real-world effects of XAI on clinician performance, confidence, and trust remain underexplored. This study involved a web-based user experiment with 31 medical geneticists to assess the impact of AI-only diagnostic assistance compared to XAI-supported diagnostics. Participants were randomly assigned to either group and completed diagnostic tasks with 18 facial images of individuals with known genetic syndromes and unaffected individuals, before and after experiencing the AI outputs. The results show that both AI-only and XAI approaches improved diagnostic accuracy and clinician confidence. The effects varied according to the accuracy of AI predictions and the clarity of syndromic features (sample difficulty). While AI support was viewed positively, users approached XAI with skepticism. Interestingly, we found a positive correlation between diagnostic improvement and XAI intervention. Although XAI support did not significantly enhance overall performance relative to AI alone, it prompted users to critically evaluate images with false predictions and influenced their confidence levels. These findings highlight the complexities of trust, perceived usefulness, and interpretability in AI-assisted diagnostics, with important implications for developing and implementing clinical decision-support tools in facial phenotyping for rare genetic diseases.
人工智能(AI)工具越来越多地应用于临床遗传学领域,通过评估患者照片来辅助诊断遗传疾病。对于人工智能的医学应用,可解释人工智能(XAI)方法通过提供可解释的输出,如显著性映射和区域相关性可视化,提供了一种很有前景的方法。XAI已被认为对于监管目的很重要,并且能让临床医生更好地理解人工智能工具在实际中的工作方式。然而,XAI对临床医生的表现、信心和信任的实际影响仍未得到充分探索。本研究对31名医学遗传学家进行了一项基于网络的用户实验,以评估仅使用人工智能的诊断辅助与XAI支持的诊断相比的影响。参与者被随机分配到两组,在体验人工智能输出之前和之后,使用18张已知遗传综合征个体和未受影响个体的面部图像完成诊断任务。结果表明,仅使用人工智能和XAI方法都提高了诊断准确性和临床医生的信心。效果因人工智能预测的准确性和综合征特征的清晰度(样本难度)而异。虽然人工智能支持受到积极评价,但用户对XAI持怀疑态度。有趣的是,我们发现诊断改善与XAI干预之间存在正相关。尽管相对于单独使用人工智能,XAI支持并没有显著提高整体性能,但它促使用户批判性地评估错误预测的图像,并影响了他们的信心水平。这些发现凸显了人工智能辅助诊断中信任、感知有用性和可解释性的复杂性,对开发和实施罕见遗传疾病面部表型分析的临床决策支持工具具有重要意义。