Search

Machine learning is increasingly used in hospital operations, revenue cycle management, and quality monitoring. These administrative applications require transparency because their outputs can influence access, resource allocation, financial decisions, and accountability. This systematic review examined explainable machine learning methods applied to operational decision support, revenue cycle analytics, and quality monitoring in healthcare administration. The review focused on the type, depth, and use of transparency methods rather than predictive performance. A PRISMA 2020–compliant search strategy was applied to PubMed, Scopus, IEEE Xplore, and Web of Science for studies published between 2017 and 2022. Screening, extraction, and narrative synthesis focused on administrative domain, model type, explanation method, stakeholder use, and risk of bias. SHAP and LIME were the most frequently discussed post-hoc explanation approaches, while feature importance, partial dependence, rule-based models, and attention mechanisms appeared in smaller subsets of the literature. Operational decision support showed the strongest explainability uptake, whereas revenue cycle analytics and administrative quality monitoring remained less developed. Explainability in healthcare administration remains uneven and often superficial. The largest gap is not the availability of explanation tools, but the limited evidence that explanations improve managerial decisions, accountability, fairness, or auditability.

Revenue cycle inefficiencies, including claim denials, coding errors, delayed reimbursement, and prior authorization workload, impose substantial administrative and financial burdens on healthcare organizations. Machine learning has been proposed as a decision-support approach for improving prediction, automation, and workflow prioritization in these areas. This systematic review examined peer-reviewed and closely related scholarly literature from 2017 to 2023 on machine learning for healthcare revenue cycle analytics. The review focused on claim denial prediction, coding automation, payment delay forecasting, and prior authorization support. A PRISMA 2020-compliant review process was used, including structured database searching, dual screening, and domain-based narrative synthesis. Risk of bias was assessed using criteria adapted from PROBAST-AI, with attention to temporal validation, data leakage, and implementation relevance. The literature showed the greatest maturity in automated clinical coding and emerging but narrower evidence for claim denial prediction. Evidence for payment delay forecasting and prior authorization support was more limited, with few studies describing prospective implementation or measured operational impact. Machine learning shows promise for improving revenue cycle decision support, but most evidence remains retrospective and technically oriented. Deployment is constrained by data fragmentation, explainability requirements, workflow integration, and regulatory caution.

Prior authorization delays impede timely patient care and contribute to administrative pressure across clinical and revenue cycle workflows. These delays can affect scheduling, medication access, procedural planning, and patient confidence in the care process. Current authorization management tools are largely reactive and often focus on tracking request status after submission. They rarely predict which requests are likely to experience approval delays or explain the operational, clinical, or payer-specific reasons behind those delays. This article proposes an interpretable machine learning model for predicting the likelihood of prior authorization approval delays. The model is designed to provide transparent, request-level explanations that can guide pre-submission correction and authorization preparation. The proposed framework uses a gradient-boosted tree model trained conceptually on historical authorization requests. Inputs include payer-specific rules, clinical documentation features, procedure type, medical necessity indicators, and historical approval timelines, with SHAP used to attribute predicted delay risk to individual features. Conceptually, the model would output a delay probability and an explanation of the dominant drivers of that prediction. These drivers could include incomplete documentation, mismatch with payer medical necessity criteria, procedure categories associated with additional review, or payer-procedure combinations with historically slow turnaround. An interpretable prior authorization delay model could support earlier correction of incomplete requests, reduce administrative waste, and improve patient access. By aligning predictive analytics with transparent explanations, the framework could make authorization preparation more proactive and accountable.