Cited by 32Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationMultimodal Machine Learning ApplicationsMachine Learning in Healthcare

Emerging trends in multi-modal artificial intelligence for clinical decision support: a narrative review

Open access
Ardic, Nurittin, Dinc, Rasit·2025·Health Informatics Journal

Abstract

Multimodal artificial intelligence (MMAI) integrates and interprets diverse data types, such as images, text, video, and audio, and offers new opportunities for clinical decision support systems (CDSSs). Traditional CDSSs rely on unimodal data, which limits their predictive accuracy and coverage. The incorporation of MMAI holds promise for more accurate diagnosis, treatment optimization, and personalized patients care by synthesizing heterogeneous data sources. This narrative review explores the growing role of MMAI in improving diagnostic sensitivity, personalizing treatment, and improving healthcare delivery through the integration of heterogeneous data sources. It examines the evolution of MMAI technologies, such as large language models, large vision models, vision-language models, and large multimodal models, and their practical applications in clinical settings. The review also addresses key ethical, technical, and infrastructure challenges, such as data quality, model interpretability, bias, and system interoperability. Finally, it provides strategic recommendations for clinicians, researchers, and policy makers to promote responsible adoption of MMAI in healthcare. While recent developments show significant promise, addressing current limitations is essential to fully realize the transformative potential of MMAI in modern medicine.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/14604582251366141

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ardic, N., & Dinc, R.
Affiliations
  • Department of Research and Development, Med-International UK Health Agency Ltd, Leicestershire, UK
  • Department of Research and Development, INVAMED Medical Innovation Institute, New York, NY, USA
Venue
Health Informatics Journal
Published
2025-07
Volume
31
Issue
3
Pages
14604582251366141-14604582251366141
ISSN
  • 1355-4743 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-4582
  • 1741-2811
OpenAlex
W4413117879
Cited by
32
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 28 · 2025: 4
FWCI
1.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Health Informatics Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
Keywords
multimodal AI, clinical decision support systems, large language models, large vision models, vision-language models, multimodal models, heterogeneous data integration, personalized treatment, diagnostic accuracy, model interpretability, algorithmic bias, data quality, interoperability, ethical considerations, responsible AI adoption
MeSH terms
Artificial Intelligence, Humans, Decision Support Systems, Clinical

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review