Loading article...
Loading article...
Stream/Area:
-
Subject:
-
Paper ID:
IJSREM65168
Volume:
10 |
6 |
Jun 2026
Pages:
1-6
Publication Frequency:
Monthly (12 issues per year)
License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.
Department of Computer Science Engineering
Maharana Pratap College of Technology, Gwalior
Department of Computer Science Engineering
Maharana Pratap College of Technology, Gwalior
Department of Computer Science Engineering
Maharana Pratap College of Technology, Gwalior
The rapid digitization of healthcare systems has generated heterogeneous data streams, including radiological images, pathology slides, laboratory measurements, electronic health records (EHRs), genomic profiles and clinical narratives. Conventional computer-aided diagnosis systems commonly depend on a single modality, which limits their ability to represent patient-specific disease mechanisms. This review analyzes multimodal deep learning frameworks that integrate medical imaging and clinical data for disease prediction, prognosis and clinical decision support. The paper synthesizes evidence from radiology, oncology, cardiology and neurodevelopmental studies, with emphasis on preprocessing, modality-specific encoders, fusion strategies and interpretability. The reviewed literature shows that multimodal integration can improve predictive performance over unimodal baselines, provided that the model is carefully validated and missing-modality problems are addressed [1]-[4]. The paper also proposes a compact reference framework based on image encoders, clinical encoders, intermediate fusion and explainable outputs. Finally, it highlights gaps related to data scarcity, cross-site validation, privacy-preserving learning and clinical trust.
KEYWORDS
This review confirms that multimodal deep learning represents the next frontier in disease prediction, as it effectively emulates the integrative reasoning used by human clinicians. By fusing high-dimensional medical imaging with structured clinical variables, laboratory results, and genomic profiles, these frameworks capture complementary disease markers that are often missed by single-modality systems [1]. Evidence across oncology, cardiology, and neurology benchmarks has shown that this integration yields significant performance gains, with accuracy improvements ranging from 1.2% to 27.7% over unimodal baselines [3]. Technically, the choice of fusion strategy remains a critical design decision. While Intermediate (Joint) Fusion is the most powerful for learning complex, non-linear interactions between pixels and clinical context, Late Fusion remains the most practical and robust choice for real-world clinical settings where records are often incomplete [1],[4]. Furthermore, the transition from standard CNNs to Vision Transformers (ViTs) and attention-based modules has significantly enhanced the model’s ability to handle global contextual relationships in large-scale radiological and pathological data [5], [6]. However, the path to clinical deployment is hindered by challenges related to data scarcity, demographic bias, and the "black-box" nature of deep learning [7]. This review highlights that a model’s success should not be measured solely by high AUROC or precision scores. For clinical adoption, frameworks must incorporate Explainable AI (XAI) tools like Grad-CAM and SHAP to provide transparent, verifiable evidence for their predictions [8]. Moving forward, future research must prioritize the development of privacy-preserving Federated Learning systems that allow multi-institutional collaboration without compromising sensitive patient data [1], [9]. Ultimately, the goal is to develop multimodal systems that are not just technically superior, but are also fair, explainable, and provide measurable value in improving patient outcomes and precision medicine [2].
[1] S.-C. Huang, A. Pareek, S. Seyyedi, I. Banerjee, and M. P. Lungren, “Fusion of medical imaging and electronic health records using deep learning: A systematic review and implementation guidelines,” npj Digital Medicine, vol. 3, Art. no. 136, 2020, doi: 10.1038/s41746-020-00341-z. [2] C. Cui, H. Yang, Y. Wang, S. Zhao, Z. Asad, L. A. Coburn, K. T. Wilson, B. A. Landman, and Y. Huo, “Deep multimodal fusion of image and non-image data in disease diagnosis and prognosis: A review,” Progress in Biomedical Engineering, vol. 5, no. 2, Art. no. 022001, 2023, doi: 10.1088/2516-1091/acc2fe. [3] A. Kline, H. Wang, Y. Li, S. Dennis, M. Hutch, Z. Xu, F. Wang, F. Cheng, and Y. Luo, “Multimodal machine learning in precision health: A scoping review,” npj Digital Medicine, vol. 5, Art. no. 171, 2022, doi: 10.1038/s41746-022-00712-8. [4] B. Lobato-Delgado, B. Priego-Torres, and D. Sanchez-Morillo, “Combining molecular, imaging, and clinical data analysis for predicting cancer prognosis,” Cancers, vol. 14, no. 13, Art. no. 3215, 2022, doi: 10.3390/cancers14133215. [5] T. Baltrušaitis, C. Ahuja, and L.-P. Morency, “Multimodal machine learning: A survey and taxonomy,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 423-443, 2019, doi: 10.1109/TPAMI.2018.2798607. [6] A. W. Salehi, S. Khan, G. Gupta, B. I. Alabduallah, A. Almjally, H. Alsolai, T. Siddiqui, and A. Mellit, “A study of CNN and transfer learning in medical imaging: Advantages, challenges, future scope,” Sustainability, vol. 15, no. 7, Art. no. 5930, 2023, doi: 10.3390/su15075930. [7] R. R. Selvaraju, M. Cogswell, A. Das, R. Vedantam, D. Parikh, and A. Batra, “Grad-CAM: Visual explanations from deep networks via gradient-based localization,” in Proc. IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2017, pp. 618-626, doi: 10.1109/ICCV.2017.74. [8] S. M. Lundberg and S.-I. Lee, “A unified approach to interpreting model predictions,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 30, 2017. [9] Y. Wang, C. Yin, and P. Zhang, “Multimodal risk prediction with physiological signals, medical images and clinical notes,” Heliyon, vol. 10, no. 5, Art. no. e26772, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e26772. [10] R. Wang et al., “Artificial intelligence for prediction of COVID-19 progression using CT imaging and clinical data,” European Radiology, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 205-212, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s00330- 021-08049-8.
Publication Date
6/18/2026
Peer Review Type
Double-Blind Peer Review
Review Rounds: 2
Documents
Article Views
0
Total views since publication
PDF Downloads
3
Total downloads since publication
Geographic Reach
5
Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.
Plagiarism Screening
This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.
Funding Information
No funding information available for this research.
Related research in the same subject area
Loading similar articles...