Consensus statement on the credibility assessment of machine learning predictors

4Citations
Citations of this article
12Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

The rapid integration of machine learning (ML) predictors into in silico medicine has revolutionized the estimation of quantities of interest that are otherwise challenging to measure directly. However, the credibility of these predictors is critical, especially when they inform high-stakes healthcare decisions. This position paper presents a consensus statement developed by experts within the In Silico World Community of Practice. We outline 12 key statements forming the theoretical foundation for evaluating the credibility of ML predictors, emphasizing the necessity of causal knowledge, rigorous error quantification, and robustness to biases. By comparing ML predictors with biophysical models, we highlight unique challenges associated with implicit causal knowledge and propose strategies to ensure reliability and applicability. Our recommendations aim to guide researchers, developers, and regulators in the rigorous assessment and deployment of ML predictors in clinical and biomedical contexts.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Aldieri, A., Gamage, T. P. B., Mattina, A. A. L., Loewe, A., Pappalardo, F., & Viceconti, M. (2025). Consensus statement on the credibility assessment of machine learning predictors. Briefings in Bioinformatics, 26(2). https://doi.org/10.1093/bib/bbaf100

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free