A brief history of artificial intelligence embryo selection: From black-box to glass-box
Human Reproduction, ISSN: 1460-2350, Vol: 39, Issue: 2, Page: 285-292
2024
- 11Citations
- 7Usage
- 39Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations11
- Citation Indexes11
- 11
- Usage7
- Abstract Views7
- Captures39
- Readers39
- 39
Review Description
With the exponential growth of computing power and accumulation of embryo image data in recent years, artificial intelligence (AI) is starting to be utilized in embryo selection in IVF. Amongst different AI technologies, machine learning (ML) has the potential to reduce operator-related subjectivity in embryo selection while saving labor time on this task. However, as modern deep learning (DL) techniques, a subcategory of ML, are increasingly used, its integrated black-box attracts growing concern owing to the well-recognized issues regarding lack of interpretability. Currently, there is a lack of randomized controlled trials to confirm the effectiveness of such black-box models. Recently, emerging evidence has shown underperformance of black-box models compared to the more interpretable traditional ML models in embryo selection. Meanwhile, glass-box AI, such as interpretable ML, is being increasingly promoted across a wide range of fields and is supported by its ethical advantages and technical feasibility. In this review, we propose a novel classification system for traditional and AI-driven systems from an embryology standpoint, defining different morphology-based selection approaches with an emphasis on subjectivity, explainability, and interpretability.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85184011591&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dead254; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38061074; https://academic.oup.com/humrep/article/39/2/285/7462256; https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ecuworks2022-2026/3788; https://ro.ecu.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4789&context=ecuworks2022-2026; https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dead254
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know