Cited by 3Machine Learning in HealthcareExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

No Black Boxes: Interpretable and Interactable Predictive Healthcare with Knowledge-Enhanced Agentic Causal Discovery

Open access
Han, Xiaoxue, Hu, Pengfei, Lu, Chang, Ding, Jun-En, Liu, Feng, Ning, Yue·2025·Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2025

Abstract

Deep learning models trained on extensive Electronic Health Records (EHR) data have achieved high accuracy in diagnosis prediction, offering the potential to assist clinicians in decision-making and treatment planning.However, these models lack two crucial features that clinicians highly value: interpretability and interactivity.The "blackbox" nature of these models makes it difficult for clinicians to understand the reasoning behind predictions, limiting their ability to make informed decisions.Additionally, the absence of interactive mechanisms prevents clinicians from incorporating their own knowledge and experience into the decisionmaking process.To address these limitations, we propose II-KEA, a knowledge-enhanced agent-driven causal discovery framework that integrates personalized knowledge databases and agentic LLMs.II-KEA enhances interpretability through explicit reasoning and causal analysis, while also improving interactivity by allowing clinicians to inject their knowledge and experience through customized knowledge bases and prompts.II-KEA is evaluated on both MIMIC-III and MIMIC-IV, demonstrating superior performance along with enhanced interpretability and interactivity, as evidenced by its strong results from extensive case studies.Our code is available at https://github.com/hanxiaoxue114/II- KEA_HealthcareAgent.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.18653/v1/2025.findings-emnlp.1271

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Han, X., Hu, P., Lu, C., Ding, J.-E., Liu, F., & Ning, Y.
Affiliations
Stevens Institute of Technology (US)
Venue
Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2025
Published
2025
Pages
23415-23427
OpenAlex
W4416034025
Cited by
2
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1
FWCI
1.91
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
National Science Foundation (2047843, 2437621)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Keywords
explainable AI, interactive AI, agentic LLMs, causal discovery, electronic health records, diagnostic prediction, clinical decision support, MIMIC-III, MIMIC-IV, interpretable prediction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review