MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415981229 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.02325

Agentic-AI Healthcare: Multilingual, Privacy-First Framework with MCP Agents

2025· preprint· en· W4415981229 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mohamed Shehab

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMulti-Agent Systems and Negotiation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuditCertificationContext (archaeology)Protocol (science)Health careArchitectureData accessAccess control

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces Agentic-AI Healthcare, a privacy-aware, multilingual, and explainable research prototype developed as a single-investigator project. The system leverages the emerging Model Context Protocol (MCP) to orchestrate multiple intelligent agents for patient interaction, including symptom checking, medication suggestions, and appointment scheduling. The platform integrates a dedicated Privacy and Compliance Layer that applies role-based access control (RBAC), AES-GCM field-level encryption, and tamper-evident audit logging, aligning with major healthcare data protection standards such as HIPAA (US), PIPEDA (Canada), and PHIPA (Ontario). Example use cases demonstrate multilingual patient-doctor interaction (English, French, Arabic) and transparent diagnostic reasoning powered by large language models. As an applied AI contribution, this work highlights the feasibility of combining agentic orchestration, multilingual accessibility, and compliance-aware architecture in healthcare applications. This platform is presented as a research prototype and is not a certified medical device.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.072
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArXiv.orgSame topicMulti-Agent Systems and NegotiationFrench-language works237,207