A multi-criteria decision analysis framework for evaluating deep learning models in healthcare research

Selecting the appropriate deep learning (DL) model for healthcare research poses a significant challenge due to the diversity of evaluation criteria and the complex nature of health-related tasks, where a single metric like accuracy is often insufficient. Motivated by the need for a structured, multi-criteria approach, this study proposes a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) framework using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Our primary contribution is the development of a comprehensive decision-making framework that integrates multiple evaluation criteria, such as accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and computational complexity, alongside empirical data from existing literature to systematically compare DL models. The framework was validated through a use case involving the selection of the best DL model for diagnosing COVID-19 using X-ray images, where we compared eight popular models, including ResNet34, SqueezeNet, and AlexNet, and it was also evaluated through comparative scenarios using traditional methods, including weighted sum, weighted average, and accuracy-based evaluation. Quantitative results show that SqueezeNet achieved the highest score in the AHP framework (88.64), while ResNet34 performed best in traditional methods such as weighted sum (588.49) and accuracy ranking (98.33%). A sensitivity analysis further demonstrated the impact of varying criteria weights, showing how changes in the importance of accuracy and precision, influenced model ranking. These findings highlight the flexibility and robustness of the AHP framework in addressing the complexities of model selection in healthcare research. The implications of this work suggest that a structured, data-driven evaluation approach can provide more nuanced and reliable insights compared to traditional methods like single-metric evaluations, ultimately supporting more informed decision-making in healthcare applications. • Introduce a multi-criteria framework for evaluating deep learning in healthcare. • Identify key evaluation criteria for deep learning through a literature review. • Balance performance and complexity in deep learning model selection. • Validate the framework with a case study on diagnosing COVID-19 using deep learning. • Compare the framework to other methods, like weighted average, to show effectiveness.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Decision Analytics Journal
Published
2024-10-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dajour.2024.100523
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Machine Learning in Healthcare
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.04
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A multi-criteria decision analysis framework for evaluating deep learning models in healthcare research

Hadeel T. El Kassabi, Mohamed Adel Serhani, Nidal Drissi
3 citations
Decision Analytics Journal
Machine Learning in Healthcare
1.04
article

A multi-criteria decision analysis framework for evaluating deep learning models in healthcare research

Hadeel T. El Kassabi, Mohamed Adel Serhani, Nidal Drissi
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Selecting the appropriate deep learning (DL) model for healthcare research poses a significant challenge due to the diversity of evaluation criteria and the complex nature of health-related tasks, where a single metric like accuracy is often insufficient. Motivated by the need for a structured, multi-criteria approach, this study proposes a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) framework using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Our primary contribution is the development of a comprehensive decision-making framework that integrates multiple evaluation criteria, such as accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and computational complexity, alongside empirical data from existing literature to systematically compare DL models. The framework was validated through a use case involving the selection of the best DL model for diagnosing COVID-19 using X-ray images, where we compared eight popular models, including ResNet34, SqueezeNet, and AlexNet, and it was also evaluated through comparative scenarios using traditional methods, including weighted sum, weighted average, and accuracy-based evaluation. Quantitative results show that SqueezeNet achieved the highest score in the AHP framework (88.64), while ResNet34 performed best in traditional methods such as weighted sum (588.49) and accuracy ranking (98.33%). A sensitivity analysis further demonstrated the impact of varying criteria weights, showing how changes in the importance of accuracy and precision, influenced model ranking. These findings highlight the flexibility and robustness of the AHP framework in addressing the complexities of model selection in healthcare research. The implications of this work suggest that a structured, data-driven evaluation approach can provide more nuanced and reliable insights compared to traditional methods like single-metric evaluations, ultimately supporting more informed decision-making in healthcare applications. • Introduce a multi-criteria framework for evaluating deep learning in healthcare. • Identify key evaluation criteria for deep learning through a literature review. • Balance performance and complexity in deep learning model selection. • Validate the framework with a case study on diagnosing COVID-19 using deep learning. • Compare the framework to other methods, like weighted average, to show effectiveness.

Decision Analytics JournalVol. 13
Humber Polytechnic (CA), University of Sharjah (AE), Concordia University (CA)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 19%
Machine Learning in Healthcare
1.04
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.