ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2026
Leveraging human-centered AI for clinical decision-making: a transparent, accurate rule extractor using non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe advent of health technologies associated with artificial intelligence (AI) is deemed a transformative shift in the delivery of medical care within our lifetime. Nevertheless, there is a communication gap between intelligent models and clinical experts. Transitioning towards Human-Centered AI can serve as a means to bridge this gap.
methodsThis study introduces a human-centered rule extraction model based on the Non-Dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm (NSGA-II), designed to enhance the interpretability and clinical utility of diagnostic tools in healthcare. This model autonomously generates diagnostic rules, adjusts threshold values for variables, and involves clinical experts in evaluating the rules, thereby ensuring the relevance and applicability of extracted rules in real-world settings.
resultsExperiments on the WBC, WDBC, and Pima datasets showed that the proposed model outperformed state-of-the-art rule extraction methods in the literature in terms of predictive value accuracy (PVA) and support. On the subset of data covered by the extracted rules, it achieved accuracy comparable to traditional black-box methods without sacrificing interpretability. The extracted rules were clinically evaluated by 13 domain physicians, with all approved rules achieving a content validity index (CVI) of at least 0.85. Additionally, the model provides multiple high-performance alternative diagnostic rules per class, giving clinicians practical flexibility.
conclusionsOur approach emphasizes the importance of multidisciplinary collaboration between AI specialists and healthcare professionals, aiming to build trust in AI-driven diagnostic systems through transparency and clinical validation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.