Emotion-Adaptive Large Language Model-Driven Clinical Decision Support: User Evaluation of the Empathic Clinical Decision Support System Framework for Trust and Explainability
Clinical Snapshot
PICO Framework
| P — Population | 33 participants with diverse medical and technical backgrounds |
| I — Intervention | Empathic clinical decision support system (empathic-CDSS) with emotion recognition and adaptive explanations |
| C — Comparator | Baseline clinical decision support system without emotion adaptation |
| O — Outcomes | Usability, personalization, clarity, system benefits, satisfaction, trust and reliability |
Bottom Line
This user evaluation study introduces an innovative empathic clinical decision support system that adapts explanations based on users' emotional states. While the concept of emotion-adaptive AI explanations is promising for enhancing clinician trust and understanding, the study has significant methodological limitations including small sample size, lack of statistical detail, and unclear generalizability. The integration of emotion recognition with clinical decision support raises important questions about privacy, accuracy, and clinical utility that require further investigation. Australian clinicians should await more robust validation studies before considering implementation, particularly given the complex regulatory landscape around AI in healthcare and the need for evidence of clinical benefit beyond user satisfaction metrics.
Key Findings
P Value: Not reported
Effect Size: Not specified in abstract
Primary Outcome: Significantly improved usability, clarity, satisfaction, and trust compared to baseline system
Nnt Or Sensitivity: Not applicable for this study type
Confidence Interval: Not reported
Clinical Application
Requires significant technical infrastructure for emotion recognition and LLM integration; implementation complexity may limit adoption Relevant to Australian digital health initiatives and AI in healthcare frameworks, though regulatory considerations for emotion monitoring in clinical settings unclear Clinicians using AI-assisted decision support systems, particularly in behavioral health and cannabis use monitoring
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The increasing prevalence of cannabis use has motivated researchers to develop computational behavioral models that predict usage patterns and related health impacts in naturalistic environments. However, the opaque nature of many artificial intelligence (AI) systems limits users' ability to interpret outputs and undermines trust. Existing explainable artificial intelligence techniques often remain overly technical and do not account for the confusion or frustration clinicians may experience when interpreting complex model explanations. OBJECTIVE: We propose and evaluate an empathic clinical decision support system (empathic-CDSS) that integrates large language models (LLMs) with real-time emotion recognition and explainability modules. The goal is to provide transparent, adaptive, and emotionally attuned explanations that enhance interpretability, user confidence, and trust in AI-assisted clinical decision-making. METHODS: Our empathic-CDSS integrates explainable artificial intelligence, causal inference, and affective computing within an interactive LLM-driven framework. Users' affective states were inferred using the circumplex model of affect, which characterizes emotions along 2 dimensions: valence (the degree of pleasure or displeasure) and arousal (the level of physiological activation or energy). Based on the captured emotional signals, the system dynamically adjusts the tone, structure, style, and complexity of its explanations generated by a fine-tuned LLM, enabling personalized and plain-language explanations. A total of 33 participants with diverse medical and technical backgrounds engaged with the system through guided evaluation tasks and postsession assessments to evaluate 6 dimensions of user-centered questions: usability, personalization and relevance of insights, clarity and comprehensibility, system benefits, satisfaction, and trust and reliability. RESULTS: Our empathic-CDSS effectively generated personalized and transparent explanations that revealed the causal reasoning behind model predictions while enhancing users' emotional engagement and trust in the system's decision logic. Continuous, affect-based feedback enabled the system to dynamically adapt explanation delivery to individual user needs. Participants reported significantly improved usability, clarity, satisfaction, and trust compared with a baseline clinical decision support system without emotion adaptation. Improvements were also observed across additional evaluation dimensions, including personalization and perceived system benefits, supporting the feasibility and added value of integrating empathy-aware communication into AI-driven clinical decision support. CONCLUSIONS: This study introduces a transparent, trustworthy, and emotionally adaptive framework for AI-assisted prediction and clinical decision support. By uniting causal reasoning, affective sensing, and LLM-based natural-language explanations, the empathic-CDSS offers a novel direction for developing emotionally intelligent and user-centered AI systems, with potential applications in behavioral monitoring and personalized interventions, including cannabis use and related health domains.
References
- 1.Zhang, T., Bae, S. W., Chung, T., & Dey, A. K. (2026). Emotion-adaptive large language model-driven clinical decision support: User evaluation of the empathic clinical decision support system framework for trust and explainability. JMIR Human Factors. https://doi.org/10.2196/89005
Related Research
The Journal of rheumatology
Examining the Role of Wearables in Inflammatory Arthritis Care: A Narrative Literature Review
3 Aug 2026
Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica
ChatGPT in urogynecology: Comparing large language model responses to human experts
3 Aug 2026
Sleep medicine
Concordance of wearable device sleep metrics with patient-reported sleep quality: A systematic review
3 Aug 2026
This content is for educational purposes for healthcare professionals only and does not constitute clinical advice. Clinical decisions should be based on individual patient assessment, current guidelines, and appropriate specialist consultation. Editorial Standards · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service