METHOD: The paper explores a combination of variational mode decomposition (VMD), and Hilbert transform (HT) called VMD-HT to extract hidden information from EEG signals. Forty-one statistical parameters extracted from the absolute value of analytical mode functions (AMF) have been classified using the explainable boosted machine (EBM) model. The interpretability of the model is tested using statistical analysis and performance measurement. The importance of the features, channels and brain regions has been identified using the glass-box and black-box approach. The model's local and global explainability has been visualized using Local Interpretable Model-agnostic Explanations (LIME), SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP), Partial Dependence Plot (PDP), and Morris sensitivity. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work that explores the explainability of the model prediction in ADHD detection, particularly for children.
RESULTS: Our results show that the explainable model has provided an accuracy of 99.81%, a sensitivity of 99.78%, 99.84% specificity, an F-1 measure of 99.83%, the precision of 99.87%, a false detection rate of 0.13%, and Mathew's correlation coefficient, negative predicted value, and critical success index of 99.61%, 99.73%, and 99.66%, respectively in detecting the ADHD automatically with ten-fold cross-validation. The model has provided an area under the curve of 100% while the detection rate of 99.87% and 99.73% has been obtained for ADHD and HC, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The model show that the interpretability and explainability of frontal region is highest compared to pre-frontal, central, parietal, occipital, and temporal regions. Our findings has provided important insight into the developed model which is highly reliable, robust, interpretable, and explainable for the clinicians to detect ADHD in children. Early and rapid ADHD diagnosis using robust explainable technologies may reduce the cost of treatment and lessen the number of patients undergoing lengthy diagnosis procedures.
METHODS: Two stochastic models (SM2 and SM3) were developed using retrospective patient respiratory elastance (Ers) from two clinical cohorts which were averaged over time intervals of 10 and 30 min respectively. A stochastic model from a previous study (SM1) was used to benchmark performance. The stochastic models were clinically validated on an independent retrospective clinical cohort of 14 patients. Differences in predictive ability were evaluated using the difference in percentile lines and cumulative distribution density (CDD) curves.
RESULTS: Clinical validation shows all three models captured more than 98% (median) of future Ers data within the 5th - 95th percentile range. Comparisons of stochastic model percentile lines reported a maximum mean absolute percentage difference of 5.2%. The absolute differences of CDD curves were less than 0.25 in the ranges of 5
METHOD: Two large datasets, including 1110 3D CT images, were split into five segments of 20% each. Each dataset's first 20% segment was separated as a holdout test set. 3D-CNN training was performed with the remaining 80% from each dataset. Two small external datasets were also used to independently evaluate the trained models.
RESULTS: The total combination of 80% of each dataset has an accuracy of 91% on Iranmehr and 83% on Moscow holdout test datasets. Results indicated that 80% of the primary datasets are adequate for fully training a model. The additional fine-tuning using 40% of a secondary dataset helps the model generalize to a third, unseen dataset. The highest accuracy achieved through transfer learning was 85% on LDCT dataset and 83% on Iranmehr holdout test sets when retrained on 80% of Iranmehr dataset.
CONCLUSION: While the total combination of both datasets produced the best results, different combinations and transfer learning still produced generalizable results. Adopting the proposed methodology may help to obtain satisfactory results in the case of limited external datasets.