Clinician concordance with a rules-based patient-facing laboratory interpretation system: a pilot review of HealthRadar with HRLens
An exploratory clinician face-validity study of HealthRadar with HRLens found high agreement for clinical reasonableness, diagnostic restraint, and overall interpretation, while identifying urgency and follow-up language as the principal refinement target.
Study summary
HealthRadar with HRLens is a rules-based, patient-facing laboratory interpretation system designed to translate laboratory results into plain-language explanations, prioritize urgency, and identify clinically coherent patterns without diagnosing disease. In this exploratory clinician face-validity study, 21 external healthcare reviewers assessed HealthRadar/HRLens interpretations across structured laboratory scenarios representing normal findings and selected abnormal patterns.
Across 839 completed Likert ratings, 85.6% were agree or strongly agree. Positive ratings were highest for clinical reasonableness and avoidance of diagnostic overstatement, both 92.9%. Overall agreement with the HRLens interpretation was 91.1%, and suitability for patient-facing communication was 83.9%. Agreement was lower for appropriateness of urgency/follow-up language at 67.1%, identifying urgency and follow-up specificity as a principal refinement area.
Strict pattern concordance was highest for diabetes-range glycemia and renal impairment, each at 95.2%. The inflammatory case showed the clearest urgency discordance: although 85.7% of reviewers selected the intended inflammatory pattern, only 28.6% agreed that the urgency/follow-up language was appropriate.
Key findings
- 21 external reviewers
- 839 completed Likert ratings
- 85.6% agree or strongly agree overall
- 92.9% clinical reasonableness
- 92.9% avoidance of diagnostic overstatement
- 91.1% overall agreement with HRLens interpretation
- 83.9% suitability for patient-facing communication
- 67.1% urgency/follow-up appropriateness
- Inflammatory case
- 85.7% pattern concordance
- 28.6% urgency/follow-up appropriateness
Keywords
Limitations
- A small exploratory pilot
- Based on a convenience sample
- Conducted using simulated laboratory scenarios
- Designed to assess clinician concordance and face validity
- Not designed to establish diagnostic accuracy
- Not designed to establish patient comprehension
- Not designed to establish clinical outcomes
- Not designed to establish implementation effectiveness
- Potentially subject to framing bias because the system developer designed the cases and survey instrument
References
No references listed for this version.
Tags
Version archive
| Version | Date | Status | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.0 | August 31, 2026 | Manuscript under journal consideration · 2026 | Initial public abstract-only research entry. |