Advancing Computational Models for Personalized Medicine: Enhancing Predictive Performance, Interpretability, and Practical Implementation for Equitable Healthcare.

Advancing Computational Models for Personalized Medicine: Enhancing Predictive Performance, Interpretability, and Practical Implementation for Equitable Healthcare.

Ayesha Ahmed Ilyas¹, Dr. Shoeb Ahmed Ilyas², Dr. Rubina³

¹Department of Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence, SR University, Warangal Urban, Telangana, India.

²Medical Superintendent, Ajara Healthcare and Research Centre, Hanamkonda, Telangana, India.

³Residential Medical Officer (RMO), Ekashilaa Hospitals, Hanamkonda, Telangana, India.

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.8110113

Received: 29 October 2024; Accepted: 04 November 2024; Published: 07 December 2024

ABSTRACT

Personalized medicine (PM) represents a transformative approach in healthcare, utilizing computational models to tailor medical interventions based on individual patient data, including genomic, environmental, clinical, and lifestyle factors. While PM has demonstrated promising outcomes, significant challenges remain in enhancing these models’ prediction performance, interpretability, and clinical implementation. Key issues include prediction inaccuracies due to data heterogeneity, interpretability barriers associated with complex AI-driven models, and gaps in real-world application, which complicate clinical integration. Addressing these gaps through advanced computational techniques, robust validation frameworks, interdisciplinary collaboration, explainable AI (XAI), and culturally adaptive practices is essential to realizing PM’s full potential. This review highlights the importance of socio-cultural and ethical considerations, particularly in promoting equitable access and culturally sensitive healthcare, as well as ensuring data privacy and informed consent. Future research should improve model generalizability across populations, develop culturally responsive models, and advance XAI techniques for greater clinical usability. These efforts are critical for advancing personalized medicine toward more precise, effective, and equitable healthcare.

Keywords: Personalized Medicine, Computational Models, Prediction Performance, Explainable AI, Clinical Implementation, Cultural Competence, Ethical Considerations, Model Generalization, Healthcare Equity

INTRODUCTION

Personalized medicine (PM) represents a transformative approach in healthcare, utilizing computational models to tailor medical interventions based on individual patient data, including genomic, environmental, clinical, and lifestyle information, to tailor healthcare interventions. (Park., 2022), (Mathur and Sutton., 2017). Precision Medicine represents an advanced approach to healthcare, focusing on the customization of prevention, diagnosis, and therapeutic interventions based on each patient’s unique molecular, clinical, and behavioral characteristics (Krzyszczyk et al., 2018; Wang and Wang, 2023). This concept reflects an ongoing evolution towards increased medical personalization, a historically varied pursuit across cultural and scientific contexts (Ramos et al., 2012). Currently, Precision Medicine is most established within oncology, where it enables targeted treatments for patients whose cancers are driven by specific genetic or molecular alterations, thus directly addressing the underlying disease mechanisms (Al., 2023; Mali and Dahivelkar., 20124). However, the broader vision of Precision Medicine aspires to extend its methodologies across diverse medical specialties, incorporating an expanding spectrum of patient-specific information. This approach also embodies a commitment to specific healthcare goals, such as enhanced efficiency and the standardization of tailored interventions, aiming to refine and optimize medical practice individually (Abbaoui et al., 2024).

In recent years, personalized medicine (PM) has transformed healthcare by enabling treatments tailored to individual patient data, including genetic, clinical, and lifestyle factors (Vallée, 2024). Despite advancements, critical challenges remain in achieving the prediction accuracy, interpretability, and practical implementation needed for effective clinical integration. Current computational models often face prediction inaccuracies due to data heterogeneity and limited generalization across diverse populations, undermining the reliability of personalized recommendations (Martínez-García & Hernández-Lemus, 2022). Additionally, the interpretability of complex AI-driven models poses a barrier, as clinicians require transparency in understanding how model outputs are generated to build trust and ensure patient safety. Furthermore, implementation gaps hinder the clinical application of these models, with issues such as inadequate validation frameworks, biases, and lack of standardized protocols complicating their use in real-world settings (Adeniran et al., 2024). Addressing these research gaps is essential for advancing computational models that not only achieve higher predictive accuracy but also offer explainability and practical utility in diverse healthcare environments.

The objective of this paper is to examine key challenges in personalized medicine (PM), focusing on improving prediction accuracy, model interpretability, and clinical integration. It addresses the socio-cultural and ethical aspects of PM, emphasizing equitable access, cultural competence, and patient data privacy. By identifying barriers and proposing solutions through interdisciplinary approaches, explainable AI (XAI), and robust validation frameworks, the paper aims to guide the development of inclusive and effective PM models that enhance patient care across diverse populations.

This paper employs a narrative review approach, synthesizing insights from diverse research studies, clinical reports, and ethical analyses to comprehensively understand the current landscape and challenges in personalized medicine (PM). This review identifies critical barriers and advances in PM implementation by integrating findings from interdisciplinary fields, including computational science, clinical medicine, bioethics, and public health. The narrative review structure allows for a broad exploration of socio-cultural, ethical, and technical considerations, offering a cohesive perspective that supports future directions for PM research and practice.

SOCIO-CULTURAL IMPLICATIONS IN PERSONALIZED MEDICINE

The sociology of personalized medicine (PM) examines how social, cultural, and organizational factors influence its development, perception, and clinical implementation, emphasizing the need for culturally competent and context-aware healthcare practices (Prainsack, 2023). As PM customizes treatments based on individual genetic, environmental, and lifestyle factors, sociocultural dynamics become critical to its effectiveness and acceptance across diverse patient populations (Erikainen & Chan, 2019). Cultural competence is essential for aligning healthcare delivery with patients’ beliefs and practices, as healthcare providers’ treatment decisions are often shaped by organizational culture, peer norms, and personal beliefs (Dubbin et al., 2013). These sociocultural influences contribute to variability in healthcare access and outcomes, underscoring the importance of a socio-culturally integrated approach to PM that respects patient identity, social context, and ethical considerations to foster equitable care.

As PM increasingly integrates diverse genetic, lifestyle, and environmental factors, cultural competence training for clinicians becomes essential. Healthcare providers must understand and respect the cultural beliefs, values, and health practices of their patients to deliver truly personalized care. Such training equips clinicians to consider sociocultural contexts when interpreting PM model outputs and making treatment recommendations, thereby fostering trust and ensuring that care is both effective and respectful. Studies illustrate the necessity for integrating socio-cultural awareness within personalized medicine. Robinson et al. (2022) emphasized the importance of culturally sensitive care for ethnic minorities, demonstrating that respecting cultural and religious beliefs can significantly improve healthcare access and patient outcomes. Cameron et al. (2019) extend this perspective by examining how factors like organizational culture and personal beliefs shape prescribing decisions in multiple sclerosis treatments, resulting in variations in healthcare practices and patient access. Such findings align with the broader goals of personalized medicine, advocating for the incorporation of patients’ unique backgrounds to deliver more compassionate, tailored, and effective care.

Lorensia (2022) on self-medication practices and Raiesi et al., (2019) on malaria control practices underscore the impact of sociocultural factors on health behaviours, reinforcing the need for culturally integrated interventions. Lorensia (2022) suggests that health education can empower individuals to make informed health decisions, a critical component in implementing effective personalized medicine strategies. Raiesi et al., (2019) using the PEN-3 cultural model, illustrate how cultural beliefs shape health behaviours in malaria control, particularly among mobile populations, thus emphasizing the importance of culturally responsive healthcare approaches. Collectively, these studies advocate for a personalized medicine model that integrates cultural sensitivity, respects individual agency, and is grounded in socio-cultural understanding to deliver truly patient-centered and equitable healthcare outcomes.

Case Study:

Clinical Scenario: Diabetes Management in a Hispanic Community of the USA

Background:

Dr. Zubair is a primary care physician working in a community health clinic that serves a large Hispanic population in the USA. Recently, he was introduced to cultural storytelling as a method to improve patient engagement, particularly for diabetes management. He notices that many of his Hispanic patients view food and meal times as central to family life and social gatherings, and they are often hesitant to make dietary changes that could affect family traditions.

Patient Profile:

Mr. Carlos, a 55-year-old Hispanic man, was recently diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. Despite Dr. Zubair’s advice about managing his diet and exercise, Mr. Carlos struggles to follow Dr. Zubair’s recommendations consistently. He shares that he enjoys his family’s traditional meals, which are high in carbs and fats, and finds it challenging to make changes without feeling disconnected from his loved ones.

Approach:

Dr. Zubair decides to use cultural storytelling to better connect with Mr. Carlos and explain the importance of managing his condition in a way that aligns with his values and family traditions. He tells Mr. Carlos a story inspired by a well-known tale from Mexican culture:

“Mr. Carlos, imagine your body is like a hardworking man on a journey through a desert. To keep going, he needs enough water to stay strong. But if he drinks too much at once, it can weigh him down, making it harder to move. For you, managing diabetes is like giving your body just the right amount of fuel to keep going without weighing it down.”

Through this story, Dr. Zubair explains that choosing foods in moderation is similar to the man rationing water to sustain his journey. He emphasizes that Carlos doesn’t need to give up the meals he loves entirely, but he can find a balanced way to enjoy them while protecting his health.

Action Plan:

Building on the story, Dr. Zubair works with Mr. Carlos to develop an action plan:

Diet: He suggests a few simple, lower-carb modifications to traditional dishes, like using whole grains or adding more vegetables, so he can still enjoy family meals.

Exercise: He recommends light walking after meals, likening it to “helping his body carry the weight of the journey.”

Family Involvement: Dr. Zubair encourages Mr. Carlos to involve his family in these changes, inviting them to support his health journey.

Outcome:

Mr. Carlos feels empowered and supported, not only because he understands the medical advice better, but because it’s framed in a way that respects his cultural values. He begins implementing these changes with his family’s help, finding it easier to stick to a health plan that honours his traditions.

Cultural storytelling may be a promising tool to promote diabetes empowerment. Interventions using storytelling may be more effective if foster an environment conducive to social support for the patients. Using cultural storytelling allowed Dr. Zubair to communicate diabetes management strategies within a culturally relevant framework, enhancing Mr. Carlos’s engagement and adherence to the diabetic treatment plan. This approach aligns with the principles of personalized medicine, respecting cultural beliefs, and providing care in a way that resonates deeply with the patient’s life and values.

Fox and Hauser (2021) explore how narrative medicine when adapted to specific medical specialties, enhances patient-centered care by addressing the distinct socio-cultural contexts of each field. Henry (2023) supports this approach, illustrating how integrating cultural intelligence with technologies such as genomics and artificial intelligence fosters a culturally attuned healthcare environment. Goddu et al., (2015) highlight the effectiveness of culturally resonant storytelling in empowering African-American patients with diabetes. By using relatable narratives through role-play, film, and group discussions, the intervention boosted participants’ confidence in managing their condition, fostering a supportive community for shared learning and behavior reinforcement. This narrative-based approach also simplified complex medical information, bridging communication gaps and enhancing engagement, ultimately aiding patients in adopting and sustaining effective self-management practices. The above studies highlight that cultural competence should be viewed as foundational, not supplementary, to personalized medicine, as it enhances the alignment of healthcare practices with diverse cultural realities.

CHALLENGES IN ENHANCING PREDICTION PERFORMANCE FOR PERSONALIZED MEDICINE

Enhancing the predictive performance, interpretability, and clinical implementation of computational models for personalized medicine is complex and requires the integration of multiple data sources, advanced computational techniques, and biological insights. Effective validation and clinical application are essential for maximizing the potential of personalized medicine, which aims to enable precise, patient-specific interventions that improve treatment efficacy and patient outcomes. Transforming big data into accurate computational models is foundational to advancing this field (Chinni & Manlhiot, 2024).

Various computational methods, including deep learning, decision trees, and ensemble methods, have proven effective in analyzing vast patient data sets to provide reliable predictions. Deep learning models are used to uncover complex patterns within genomic and clinical data, making them suitable for predicting treatment responses in oncology and beyond (Chiu et al., 2019). Decision trees, commonly used for their simplicity and interpretability, help clinicians understand patient-specific factors influencing treatment outcomes (Banegas-Luna et al., 2021). Ensemble methods, which combine predictions from multiple models to reduce error and enhance accuracy, are particularly valuable in addressing the variability within diverse patient populations (Moon et al., 2024). Reza and Kayvan, (2016) highlighted the importance of investing in computational models tailored for P4 medicine (predictive, preventative, personalized, and participatory Medicine). This aligns with Gupta et al. (2016), who demonstrate the effectiveness of machine learning on genomic data to forecast drug efficacy, thus enabling highly customized treatment plans.

Robust validation frameworks are essential to ensure that computational models are both reliable and generalizable across different populations. Common evaluation metrics such as cross-validation, Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves, sensitivity, and specificity play a critical role in assessing model accuracy and clinical applicability (Steyerberg, & Vergouwe, 2014), (Collins et al., 2015) (Caruana et al., 2015). Cross-validation techniques, where data is divided into training and testing subsets, help assess the model’s ability to generalize beyond the training data (Westerhuis et al., 2008). ROC curves provide insight into the trade-off between true positive and false positive rates, allowing clinicians to evaluate the model’s predictive accuracy. Sensitivity and specificity are crucial metrics in assessing the model’s ability to correctly identify relevant clinical outcomes, ensuring that the model delivers accurate and actionable insights for patient care (Luque-Fernandez et al., 2019).

Technology Foundations and Robust Infrastructure Requirements for Integration of Personalised Medicine

Implementing computational models in clinical practice requires a robust technological foundation that supports diverse data sources. For personalized medicine, this means having an infrastructure capable of integrating data from genomic, clinical, and lifestyle variables to facilitate tailored interventions. Estape et al. (2016) emphasize the need for a robust infrastructure to support data integration and enable targeted interventions. Standardization rules for in silico techniques further ensure consistency and reliability in model applications, as emphasized by Brunak et al. (2020). Davis et al. (2019) highlight the need for systems biology tools to manage the complexity of personalized medicine. However, the PM field also faces policy-related challenges that need addressing to enhance predictive accuracy and facilitate clinical implementation (Lee et al., 2012).

ENHANCING GENERALIZABILITY OF PM ACROSS DIVERSE POPULATIONS AND CHALLENGES

For computational models in personalized medicine to perform effectively across diverse populations and clinical settings, they must be able to generalize well. Gameiro et al. (2018) stress the need for methodologies capable of accurately predicting treatment outcomes across demographic groups. However, models often struggle with generalization due to data quality issues and heterogeneity within training datasets, highlighting the necessity of advanced data integration and validation practices (Cahan et al., 2019).

A major challenge for personalized medicine (PM) models lies in their generalization. Models trained on specific populations may not perform effectively when applied to different demographic groups or healthcare settings. Robust validation protocols are therefore required to evaluate model performance across diverse populations and clinical contexts. Conducting external validation studies is crucial to ensure that models maintain accuracy and reliability in real-world applications (Corti et al., 2024). To improve generalization, researchers can employ techniques such as transfer learning, which allows models developed on one dataset to adapt to another. This method helps to reduce population bias and broaden model applicability across various healthcare environments (Shemie et al., 2021). Additionally, ongoing monitoring of model performance in clinical settings is necessary to detect and address potential biases, ensuring that models remain relevant and accurate over time.

DATA STANDARDIZATION FOR PM

A standardized approach to data handling and computational methodologies is critical for improving prediction performance in personalized medicine. Estape et al. (2016) emphasize that consistency in data handling enables practitioners to derive more reliable insights. Davis et al. (2019) advocate for computational methods capable of navigating the complexities of patient data through systems biology. Creating standardized protocols for data collection and integration is essential for building high-quality, comprehensive datasets that capture the complexities of patient health. Standardization ensures consistency, reliability, and comparability across studies, providing a robust foundation for training and validating models in personalized medicine. This uniformity supports collaboration between institutions and enables the broader applicability of PM models across diverse patient populations (Hulsen et al., 2019). PM requires highly sensitive patient data, including genetic, clinical, and personal information. This sensitivity makes privacy protection paramount, necessitating advanced privacy-preserving technologies such as differential privacy and secure multi-party computation. These tools help ensure that patient data remains secure even in aggregated datasets used across institutions (Alicherif, 2023).

Policymakers play a vital role in establishing frameworks that ensure consistent model evaluation and adaptability to scientific advancements. As Lee et al. (2012) note, evolving policy support is key to overcoming these barriers and enhancing predictive performance across healthcare applications.

INTERPRETABILITY OF MODELS FOR PM

Recent advancements in deep learning show promise in enhancing the interpretability of complex models, particularly in personalized medicine. For instance, Sun and Chen have demonstrated that integrating personal transcriptome data into deep learning models for cancer patient survival can improve interpretability by identifying gene-specific contributions to survival predictions (Gupta et al., 2016). This work is further supported by Tarkkala et al. (2019), who emphasize the importance of data-driven techniques in personalized medicine and the development of algorithms capable of handling extensive genomic datasets efficiently (Tarkkala et al., 2019).

To address the interpretability challenge, a multi-faceted approach is recommended, combining intrinsic interpretability (models that are inherently understandable by design) and post-hoc interpretability (techniques applied after model training to explain complex models) (Murdoch et al., 2019). This dual strategy bridges the gap between model complexity and clinical usability, providing healthcare professionals with reliable, understandable insights. This combination ensures that AI-driven predictions are not only accurate but also accessible to clinicians, ultimately supporting more informed decision-making processes in personalized medicine.

The interpretability of computational models remains a significant challenge in personalized medicine (Gimeno, 2023). As models grow increasingly intricate, understanding the rationale behind their specific predictions becomes progressively difficult, which can hinder professional trust and patient acceptance. Without transparent model outputs, clinicians and patients may struggle to rely on AI-driven predictions, even when these models demonstrate high predictive accuracy. The absence of clarity can impede drug adherence, as seen in the work of MacDonell et al. (2012), which emphasizes how personalized feedback mechanisms tailored to individual needs can improve both clarity and adherence to interventions.

Barriers to interpretability in computational models in healthcare and personalized medicine

Deep neural networks (DNNs), like convolutional neural networks (CNNs) in medical image analysis, have multiple hidden layers with thousands of parameters. This complexity makes it difficult to understand how input features influence the output, creating a “black box” effect where the underlying mechanics are opaque to users (Muhammad & Bendechache, 2024; de Souza Jr, 2021; Salahuddin et al., 2022). Genomic data in personalized medicine has thousands of features (genes) for each sample. Interpreting how individual genetic markers or interactions influence outcomes is challenging because models often aggregate these features in ways humans do not easily understand (Hassan et al., 2022).

Unlike model accuracy or AUC scores, interpretability lacks universally agreed-upon metrics. Different interpretability tools (e.g., LIME, SHAP, Grad-CAM) may yield conflicting insights. For instance, SHAP values may highlight different feature importance than LIME in the same predictive model, creating confusion for end-users on which explanation to trust (Sadeghi et al., 2024; Band et al., 2023).  Complex ensemble models, like XGBoost or random forests, are often more accurate but less interpretable compared to simpler models such as logistic regression. In medical diagnosis, clinicians may face a choice between using a highly accurate yet opaque model or a less accurate, interpretable one, affecting their confidence in model-driven decisions (Mesquitan & Marques, 2024).

Models trained on data from one population (e.g., a specific demographic or geographic region) may not generalize well to another. This lack of transferability makes explanations specific to one data set misleading when applied to another, as different features may be important for diverse populations (Kim et al., 2019). Techniques like Grad-CAM may highlight regions in medical images that the model considers important, but these highlighted regions may not have clear medical significance. This uncertainty in what highlighted features truly mean can be a barrier, as clinicians may struggle to interpret these areas in the context of disease (Salahuddin et al., 2022; Band et al., 2023).

If a clinician is unfamiliar with AI concepts like feature importance or activation maps, interpretability tools may fail to convey actionable insights, especially in complex cases where understanding why a model made a specific prediction (like identifying a tumor’s boundaries) is critical for treatment decisions (Allgaier et al., 2023).  Local interpretability methods like LIME may provide feature explanations only in the vicinity of a specific prediction, not for the model as a whole. This can lead to partial explanations that may overlook interactions across different predictions, reducing interpretability in cases requiring a global model understanding (Henninger & Strobl, 2023).

EXPLAINABLE AI (XAI) IN PERSONALISED MEDICINE

As computational models become more sophisticated, so does the need for Explainable AI (XAI) methods that allow clinicians to understand and effectively apply model outputs in clinical settings. Interpretability is essential for the clinical acceptance of personalized medicine models, as healthcare providers need to trust and comprehend the AI’s decision-making process. Techniques like Grad-CAM (Gradient-weighted Class Activation Mapping) and attention mechanisms can visually represent model predictions, making it easier for clinicians to understand the reasoning behind the outputs.

The Role of Explainable AI (XAI) in Enhancing Model Interpretability

Explainable AI (XAI) methods are crucial for providing clinicians with insights into model predictions, which fosters trust and facilitates the clinical adoption of AI-driven recommendations. Several key techniques in XAI have proven effective in improving interpretability for healthcare applications. SHAP (Shapley Additive Explanations), assigns importance values to each feature by calculating the impact of each variable on the prediction, offering clinicians a clear understanding of which factors are influencing a model’s decision. This method is particularly valuable in personalized medicine, where understanding feature importance (such as genetic markers or lifestyle factors) can help tailor interventions to individual patients (Nahiduzzaman et al., 2024, Guleria et al., 2024).

Another technique, LIME (Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanations), provides locally faithful explanations by creating an interpretable model that approximates the complex model’s behavior in a specific area around a particular prediction. In practice, LIME can be used to explain why a model has predicted a certain risk level for a patient by generating a simpler model that shows the most relevant features contributing to that prediction, allowing clinicians to better understand and communicate these insights (Wang, 2024, Holm, 2023).

For image-based diagnostics, Grad-CAM (Gradient-weighted Class Activation Mapping) is commonly used to visualize areas within an image that the model has focused on (Selvaraju, 2016, Yang et al., 2022). For instance, Grad-CAM can highlight regions within a medical scan that are most relevant for identifying a potential tumour, helping radiologists verify and interpret the model’s reasoning (Talaat, 2024, Kumar et al., 2023). These techniques collectively bridge the gap between complex model outputs and practical clinical decision-making, enabling clinicians to confidently apply AI-driven insights.

Challenges in Implementing XAI in Personalized Medicine

Applying explainable AI (XAI) in personalized medicine presents several challenges. A primary issue is the trade-off between model complexity and interpretability; as models grow more sophisticated to capture complex patient data relationships, their interpretability often declines, complicating clinical integration where clarity is crucial for decision-making. Model fidelity also poses a challenge, as interpretable explanations may oversimplify the true mechanisms of complex models, potentially leading to misinterpretations. Computational demands, especially with methods like SHAP, can hinder real-time explanations in fast-paced clinical environments. Furthermore, generalizability across diverse patient populations remains a concern, as XAI techniques may interpret features inconsistently across different demographic groups. Balancing interpretability with model performance is essential, and developing hybrid models alongside XAI methods tailored for clinical applications will be critical to advancing explainable AI in personalized medicine (Band et al., 2023; Abdullah et al., 2021).

CLINICAL VALIDATION AND IMPLEMENTATION

Effective clinical validation protocols are essential to ensure that computational models are reliable and applicable in real-world healthcare settings. The rapid advancements in AI often exceed the pace of current regulatory frameworks, creating challenges around the approval and oversight of these models in clinical practice (Hofmarcher, 2014). Koga and Ochiai (2019) highlight the importance of patient-derived xenograft models in preclinical studies, which can facilitate the translation of research into clinical application. Despite these efforts, translating AI models into real-world practice continues to present significant obstacles, underscoring the need for rigorous clinical validation.

ETHICAL AND PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN IMPLEMENTING PERSONALIZED MEDICINE (PM)

Personalized medicine introduces important ethical considerations that must be addressed to ensure equitable and responsible use of patient data. Data privacy is a paramount concern, as PM relies on sensitive personal information, including genomic, lifestyle, and health data. Ensuring robust data protection measures and securing informed consent from patients for data use is crucial to maintaining patient trust and confidentiality. Informed consent also entails communicating how patient data will be used in PM models, allowing patients to make fully informed decisions about their participation. Ethical PM implementation demands representational diversity to ensure applicability across diverse populations. Data collection protocols should specify requirements for sampling across various demographics, accounting for ethnicity, age, gender, and socioeconomic factors. By including diverse datasets, PM can better serve all patient populations, reducing disparities in healthcare outcomes (Tang et al., 2024).

Ethical data practices emphasize using only the minimum amount of personal data required for specific PM applications. Implementing these principles not only protects patient privacy but also aligns with regulatory guidelines (e.g., the Health Data Management Policy under Ayushman Bharat Digital Mission (ABDM), General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) of European Union (EU)) that restrict the use of data to predefined purposes. Data minimization practices in PM encourage researchers to handle data conservatively, accessing only what is strictly necessary for each project phase (Ganapathy, 2024; Scheibner et al., 2021).

In PM, traditional consent models may be insufficient given the complexity of data use, sharing, and re-utilization. An enhanced, dynamic consent model allows patients to update their consent preferences over time, adapting to new data uses as PM research progresses. This flexibility aligns with patients’ rights to control their data while enabling ongoing, transparent communication about its use (Blobel et al., 2016). PM requires ongoing communication about how data will be stored, analyzed, and potentially shared. Providing patients with clear, accessible information regarding data uses—such as model training and validation—builds trust and helps patients make informed decisions. Transparency can also include regular updates on research findings that derive from their data, ensuring patients feel valued and informed participants in PM (Khanna et al., 2020; Blasimme, et al., 2018). Ensuring that PM models are fair and inclusive requires a proactive approach to bias detection, particularly when collecting and standardizing diverse datasets. This includes conducting bias audits and utilizing fairness-enhancing algorithms to detect and correct imbalances in model outputs that may disproportionately affect underrepresented groups (Vidyadhari Chinta et al., 2024).

Ethical frameworks in PM should clarify patients’ ownership rights over their data. Patients often provide data without clear knowledge of their rights or how it will be used. By granting patients ownership and access rights, PM respects patient autonomy and supports transparency (Rajam, 2020; Blobel et al., 2016). Patients should have the right to access insights derived from their data. This approach encourages patient empowerment, allowing them to engage meaningfully with PM research and benefit directly from findings. Additionally, clear data-sharing agreements should outline the terms of access for third parties, such as research institutions or commercial partners (Whicher et al., 2020; Hoeyer, 2019).

Transparency and Accountability in PM Models

As PM relies on complex algorithms, ensuring that patients and healthcare providers can understand how data influences model outcomes is crucial. Ethical frameworks should mandate audit trails that record how data is processed, used in training models, and contributes to predictions. This transparency facilitates accountability, enabling clinicians to make informed, ethical decisions grounded in reliable PM insights (Minssen et al., 2020).

Ethical considerations in PM include making model outcomes interpretable to ensure they are clinically actionable. Clinicians must be able to understand and trust the outputs of PM models. Providing interpretable models supports informed clinical decision-making and helps bridge the gap between complex AI models and practical patient care (Lu et al., 2023).

Data Longevity, Repurposing, and Patient Rights

Ethical PM practices require clearly defined guidelines on data longevity, specifying how long data will be stored and under what conditions it can be repurposed. Secondary data use must align with the initial consent terms and maintain relevance to PM objectives. Ethically sound frameworks consider patients’ rights to withdraw their data from long-term studies, balancing innovation with respect for patient preferences (Cascini et al., 2024).

Patients may not always be aware of how their data could be reused in future research unrelated to the initial PM application. To address this, ethical guidelines should require explicit consent for secondary research, allowing patients to opt out of unrelated studies. Clear definitions of secondary use scenarios prevent misuse and ensure that patient autonomy remains central in PM data practices (Zenker et al., 2022; Vlachothanasi, 2024).

Patients play a pivotal role in personalized medicine (PM) by providing the essential genetic and lifestyle data that underpin PM models. They seek clear assurances that their data will be used transparently, responsibly, and in strict accordance with their consent. Patient-centered frameworks, such as dynamic consent, empower individuals to actively manage their data preferences, enhancing autonomy and fostering trust. Educating patients on PM models and data use further strengthens engagement, ensuring that recommendations are comprehensible and aligned with patient expectations. Additionally, equitable access to PM remains crucial, with inclusive policies needed to address cost barriers, ensuring that PM benefits are accessible to all (Khanna & Srivastava, 2020).

Healthcare providers play a crucial role in implementing personalized medicine (PM) insights, tasked with translating complex algorithmic outputs into actionable care plans within clinical workflows. However, many clinicians may require support in understanding these advanced models, particularly in terms of interpretability, which is vital for fostering trust and facilitating clear communication with patients. Practical PM frameworks should incorporate clinician-focused education to equip providers with the knowledge needed to interpret and apply PM insights effectively, ensuring that patients receive optimal care. Moreover, ethical considerations and patient safety are paramount; providers must navigate the ethical complexities of PM, balancing innovative practices with rigorous patient safety standards. Concerns around transparency, model validation, and potential biases in algorithms underscore the importance of involving healthcare providers in discussions about ethical frameworks and validation protocols to uphold clinical reliability. For PM tools to be seamlessly effective, they must integrate into existing workflows without imposing additional burdens on clinicians. Intuitive interfaces and efficient processes, informed by provider input, are essential for designing PM systems that enhance rather than hinder clinical practice, allowing clinicians to make the most of PM without increased workload demands (Nasarian et al., 2024).

Policymakers play a pivotal role in personalized medicine (PM) by establishing regulatory frameworks that protect data privacy, ensure model validation, and uphold standards of accuracy and fairness. Balancing innovation with stringent safeguards, they adapt policies like GDPR to keep pace with PM advancements, ensuring patient protection. Equity and accessibility are key, as policymakers work to broaden PM access through funding incentives for underserved populations, aiming to prevent health disparities. Ethical data use is essential; policies that mandate patient-centered consent, data minimization, and transparent data reuse protocols foster public trust. Through educational outreach, policymakers further support public understanding and trust in PM, empowering informed decisions and fostering societal support for its integration into healthcare (Morrison & Prainsack, 2022; Obijuru et al., 2024).

Balancing Accuracy and Ethical Responsibility in Data Use

PM models often require extensive datasets to function effectively, but this can lead to ethical dilemmas around data accuracy and generalizability. For example, over-reliance on data from specific populations may introduce bias, limiting the model’s applicability to other groups and reducing predictive accuracy. Establishing guidelines to ensure diverse, representative datasets can help address these biases, while ethical oversight committees can provide governance to uphold responsible data use. By integrating these socio-cultural and ethical considerations into PM practices, personalized medicine can evolve in a manner that respects patient privacy, promotes equity, and delivers culturally sensitive healthcare solutions (Cahan et al., 2019).

Interdisciplinary Collaboration for Ethical and Effective Model Development

Effective and ethical model development in personalized medicine (PM) relies heavily on collaboration between data scientists, clinicians, ethicists, and policymakers. Such interdisciplinary teamwork ensures that computational models are aligned with clinical needs and ethical standards, creating responsible, patient-centered solutions that integrate technological expertise with real-world healthcare requirements. By bringing together diverse insights, interdisciplinary collaboration helps to identify potential risks, enhance model robustness, and promote trust across stakeholders (Torres‐Padilla et al., 2020).

IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES FOR INTEGRATING PM MODELS IN CLINICAL SETTINGS

To successfully translate PM computational models into real-world clinical environments, strategic implementation steps are essential. Pilot programs offer a practical approach to evaluate model performance in controlled, real-world settings before broader deployment. In these pilot stages, data scientists and clinicians can work closely to monitor outcomes, address issues, and optimize model functionality based on real-time feedback. Stakeholder engagement is also critical to gain support and gather input from all parties involved in patient care, including physicians, nurses, administrative staff, and patients. Involving these stakeholders early in the process allows for valuable insights into potential barriers, operational needs, and ethical concerns (Fröhlich et al., 2018).

Inter-departmental collaborations within healthcare facilities can facilitate the smooth integration of PM models. For instance, IT departments can assist with data infrastructure and security, while clinical departments provide patient data and feedback on model usability. This collaboration ensures that the model is both technically compatible and clinically relevant, promoting seamless adoption across departments (Lee et al., 2021; Gowda et al., 2024).

COLLABORATION WITH CLINICIANS AND POLICYMAKERS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PM

For successful implementation, collaboration with clinicians and policymakers is essential. Engaging clinicians in the model development and validation phases helps tailor the models to specific clinical needs and ensures that they address practical considerations such as ease of use, interpretability, and patient care priorities. Policymakers also play a crucial role by providing regulatory guidance and supporting frameworks that facilitate clinical adoption. Through policies that standardize validation requirements, data privacy protections, and ethical oversight, policymakers can help streamline model integration and reduce regulatory uncertainties (Aguilera-Cobos et al., 2023).

Additionally, these collaborations foster trust in computational models by ensuring transparency and accountability in model development and deployment. Regular feedback loops between data scientists, clinicians, and regulatory bodies allow for continuous monitoring, ensuring that the models remain accurate, secure, and aligned with evolving clinical standards. By addressing barriers to clinical implementation collaboratively, interdisciplinary teams can create more robust, adaptable, and trustworthy PM models that effectively enhance patient care.

ADDRESSING DISPARITIES IN ACCESS TO PM TECHNOLOGIES

The implementation of PM technology raises concerns about healthcare equity, as disparities in access to advanced PM tools may exacerbate existing inequalities. High costs, lack of resources, and limited availability in underserved areas can restrict access to PM benefits for certain populations, potentially widening health disparities. Policymakers and healthcare institutions must work together to ensure that PM tools and services are accessible to all demographic groups, regardless of socioeconomic status or geographic location (Hoagland & Kipping, 2024).

CONCLUSION

The integration of computational models into personalized medicine (PM) presents transformative potential for healthcare, enabling tailored treatment strategies that significantly enhance patient outcomes. However, challenges in prediction performance, model interpretability, and clinical implementation remain barriers to fully realizing PM’s impact. Overcoming these challenges requires improved data management, robust validation frameworks, explainable AI (XAI), interdisciplinary collaboration, continuous monitoring, and proactive bias reduction to ensure that PM tools are reliable and equitable across diverse patient populations. These advancements will drive a more effective, equitable, and patient-centered healthcare system.

Future research should focus on advancing XAI applications within PM, aiming to make complex models more interpretable and actionable for clinicians, thus enhancing trust and usability in clinical settings. Additionally, developing culturally adaptive models that account for diverse socio-cultural contexts is essential for fostering patient engagement and achieving positive health outcomes in varied populations. Research aimed at improving model generalization across populations will further support the broad applicability and efficacy of PM. Together, these research directions provide a clear path for advancing PM, addressing current limitations, and expanding its capacity to deliver precise, effective, and inclusive healthcare solutions that align with the needs of all patient groups. This trajectory underscores PM’s commitment to a healthcare paradigm that is both scientifically innovative and deeply respectful of patient diversity and autonomy.

REFERENCES

1. Abbaoui, W., Retal, S., El Bhiri, B., Kharmoum, N., & Ziti, S. (2024). Towards revolutionizing precision healthcare: A systematic literature review of artificial intelligence methods in precision medicine. Informatics in Medicine Unlocked, 101475.
2. Abdullah, T. A., Zahid, M. S. M., & Ali, W. (2021). A review of interpretable ML in healthcare: taxonomy, applications, challenges, and future directions. Symmetry, 13(12), 2439.
3. Adeniran, A. A., Onebunne, A. P., & William, P. (2024). Explainable AI (XAI) in healthcare: Enhancing trust and transparency in critical decision-making. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 23(3), 2647–2658.
4. Aguilera-Cobos, L., García-Sanz, P., Rosario-Lozano, M. P., Claros, M. G., & Blasco-Amaro, J. A. (2023). An innovative framework to determine the implementation level of personalized medicine: A systematic review. Frontiers in Public Health, 11, 1039688.
5. Al Meslamani, A. Z. (2023). The future of precision medicine in oncology. Expert Review of Precision Medicine and Drug Development, 8(1), 43-47.
6. Alam, M. N., Kaur, M., & Kabir, M. S. (2023). Explainable AI in Healthcare: Enhancing transparency and trust upon legal and ethical consideration. Int Res J Eng Technol, 10(6), 1-9.
7. Alicherif, N. (2023). Privacy Preserving in the Medical Sector: Techniques and Applications. In Advanced Bioinspiration Methods for Healthcare Standards, Policies, and Reform (pp. 221-239). IGI Global.
8. Allgaier, J., Mulansky, L., Draelos, R. L., & Pryss, R. (2023). How does the model make predictions? A systematic literature review on the explainability power of machine learning in healthcare. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, 143, 102616.
9. Band, S. S., Yarahmadi, A., Hsu, C. C., Biyari, M., Sookhak, M., Ameri, R., … & Liang, H. W. (2023). Application of explainable artificial intelligence in medical health: A systematic review of interpretability methods. Informatics in Medicine Unlocked, 40, 101286.
10. Banegas-Luna, A. J., Peña-García, J., Iftene, A., Guadagni, F., Ferroni, P., Scarpato, N., … & Pérez-Sánchez, H. (2021). Towards the interpretability of machine learning predictions for medical applications targeting personalised therapies: A cancer case survey. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 22(9), 4394.
11. Blasimme, A., Fadda, M., Schneider, M., & Vayena, E. (2018). Data sharing for precision medicine: policy lessons and future directions. Health Affairs, 37(5), 702-709.
12. Blobel, B., Lopez, D. M., & Gonzalez, C. (2016). Patient privacy and security concerns on big data for personalized medicine. Health and Technology, 6, 75-81.
13. Brunak, S., Bjerre Collin, C., Eva Ó Cathaoir, K., Golebiewski, M., Kirschner, M., Kockum, I., … & Waltemath, D. (2020). Towards standardization guidelines for in silico approaches in personalized medicine. Journal of integrative bioinformatics, 17(2-3), 20200006.
14. Cahan, E. M., Hernandez-Boussard, T., Thadaney-Israni, S., & Rubin, D. L. (2019). Putting the data before the algorithm in big data addressing personalized healthcare. NPJ Digital Medicine, 2(1), 78.
15. Cahan, E. M., Hernandez-Boussard, T., Thadaney-Israni, S., & Rubin, D. L. (2019). Putting the data before the algorithm in big data addresses personalized healthcare. NPJ Digital Medicine, 2(1), 78.
16. Cameron, E., Rog, D., McDonnell, G., Overell, J., Pearson, O., & French, D. P. (2019). Factors influencing multiple sclerosis disease-modifying treatment prescribing decisions in the United Kingdom: a qualitative interview study. Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders, 27, 378-382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msard.2018.11.023.
17. Caruana, R., Lou, Y., Gehrke, J., Koch, P., Sturm, M., & Elhadad, N. (2015, August). Intelligible models for healthcare: Predicting pneumonia risk and hospital 30-day readmission. In Proceedings of the 21th ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining (pp. 1721-1730).
18. Cascini, F., Pantovic, A., Al-Ajlouni, Y. A., Puleo, V., De Maio, L., & Ricciardi, W. (2024). Health data sharing attitudes towards primary and secondary use of data: a systematic review. EClinicalMedicine, 71.
19. Chinni, B. K., & Manlhiot, C. (2024). Emerging analytical approaches for personalized medicine using machine learning in pediatric and congenital heart disease. Canadian Journal of Cardiology.
20. Chiu, Y. C., Chen, H. I. H., Zhang, T., Zhang, S., Gorthi, A., Wang, L. J., … & Chen, Y. (2019). Predicting drug response of tumors from integrated genomic profiles by deep neural networks. BMC medical genomics, 12, 143-155.
21. Collins, G. S., Reitsma, J. B., Altman, D. G., & Moons, K. G. (2015). Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD) the TRIPOD statement. Circulation, 131(2), 211-219.
22. Corti, C., Cobanaj, M., Criscitiello, C., & Curigliano, G. (2024). Artificial intelligence in cancer research and precision medicine. In Artificial Intelligence for Medicine (pp. 1-23). Academic Press.
23. Davis, J. D., Kumbale, C. M., Zhang, Q., & Voit, E. O. (2019). Dynamical systems approaches to personalized medicine. Current opinion in biotechnology, 58, 168-174.
24. de Souza Jr, L. A., Mendel, R., Strasser, S., Ebigbo, A., Probst, A., Messmann, H., … & Palm, C. (2021). Convolutional Neural Networks for the evaluation of cancer in Barrett’s esophagus: Explainable AI to lighten up the black-box. Computers in Biology and Medicine, 135, 104578.
25. Dubbin, L. A., Chang, J. S., & Shim, J. K. (2013). Cultural health capital and the interactional dynamics of patient-centered care. Social science & medicine, 93, 113-120.
26. Erikainen, S., & Chan, S. (2019). Contested futures: envisioning “Personalized,”“Stratified,” and “Precision” medicine. New Genetics and Society, 38(3), 308-330.
27. Estape, E. A., Mays, M. H., & Sternke, E. A. (2016). Translation in data mining to advance personalized medicine for health equity. Intelligent Information Management, 8(01), 9.
28. Fox, D. and Hauser, J. (2021). Exploring perception and usage of narrative medicine by physician specialty: a qualitative analysis. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13010-021-00106-w
29. Fröhlich, H., Balling, R., Beerenwinkel, N., Kohlbacher, O., Kumar, S., Lengauer, T., … & Zupan, B. (2018). From hype to reality: data science enabling personalized medicine. BMC medicine, 16, 1-15.
30. Gameiro, G. R., Sinkunas, V., Liguori, G. R., & Auler-Júnior, J. O. C. (2018). Precision medicine: changing the way we think about healthcare. Clinics, 73, e723.
31. Ganapathy, K. (2024). A Glimpse into the Deployment of Digital Health in India. Telehealth and Medicine Today, 9(1).
32. Gimeno, M., Sada del Real, K., & Rubio, A. (2023). Precision oncology: a review to assess interpretability in several explainable methods. Briefings in Bioinformatics, 24(4), bbad200.
33. Goddu, A. P., Raffel, K. E., & Peek, M. E. (2015). A story of change: The influence of narrative on African-Americans with diabetes. Patient Education and Counseling, 98(8), 1017-1024.
34. Gowda, D., Shashikala, S. V., Manu, Y. M., Kaur, M., & Jha, S. K. (2024). Introduction to cloud computing and healthcare 5.0: Transforming the future of healthcare. In Federated Learning and AI for Healthcare 5.0 (pp. 26-45). IGI Global.
35. Guleria, P., Srinivasu, P. N., & Hassaballah, M. (2024). Diabetes prediction using Shapley additive explanations and DSaaS over machine learning classifiers: a novel healthcare paradigm. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 83(14), 40677-40712.
36. Gupta, S., Chaudhary, K., Kumar, R., Gautam, A., Nanda, J. S., Dhanda, S. K., … & Raghava, G. P. (2016). Prioritization of anticancer drugs against a cancer using genomic features of cancer cells: A step towards personalized medicine. Scientific reports, 6(1), 23857.
37. Hassan, M., Awan, F. M., Naz, A., deAndrés-Galiana, E. J., Alvarez, O., Cernea, A., … & Kloczkowski, A. (2022). Innovations in genomics and big data analytics for personalized medicine and health care: A review. International journal of molecular Sciences, 23(9), 4645.
38. Henry, J. A. (2023). Culture intelligent workflow, structure, and steps. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2023.985469
39. Hoagland, A., & Kipping, S. (2024). Challenges in promoting health equity and reducing disparities in access across new and established technologies. Canadian Journal of Cardiology.
40. Hoagland, A., & Kipping, S. (2024). Challenges in promoting health equity and reducing disparities in access across new and established technologies. Canadian Journal of Cardiology.
41. Hoeyer, K. (2019). Data as promise: Reconfiguring Danish public health through personalized medicine. Social studies of science, 49(4), 531-555.
42. Hofmarcher, M. M. (2014). The Austrian health reform 2013 is promising but requires continuous political ambition. Health policy, 118(1), 8-13.
43. Holm, S. L. J. M. (2023). AL-DLIME-Active Learning-Based Deterministic Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanations: A Comparison with LIME and DLIME in the Field of Medicine (Master’s thesis).
44. Hulsen, T., Jamuar, S. S., Moody, A. R., Karnes, J. H., Varga, O., Hedensted, S., … & McKinney, E. F. (2019). From big data to precision medicine. Frontiers in medicine, 6, 34.
45. Khanna, S., & Srivastava, S. (2020). Patient-centric ethical frameworks for privacy, transparency, and bias awareness in deep learning-based medical systems. Applied Research in Artificial Intelligence and Cloud Computing, 3(1), 16-35.
46. Kim, E., Caraballo, P. J., Castro, M. R., Pieczkiewicz, D. S., & Simon, G. J. (2019). Towards more accessible precision medicine: building a more transferable machine learning model to support prognostic decisions for micro-and macrovascular complications of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Journal of medical systems, 43, 1-12.
47. Koga, Y., & Ochiai, A. (2019). Systematic review of patient-derived xenograft models for preclinical studies of anti-cancer drugs in solid tumors. Cells, 8(5), 418.
48. Krzyszczyk, P., Acevedo, A., Davidoff, E. J., Timmins, L. M., Marrero-Berrios, I., Patel, M., White, C., Lowe, C., Sherba, J. J., Hartmanshenn, C., O’Neill, K. M., Balter, M. L., Fritz, Z. R., Androulakis, I. P., Schloss, R. S., & Yarmush, M. L. (2018). The growing role of precision and personalized medicine for cancer treatment. Technology, 6(3-4), 79–100.
49. Kumar, K. V., Baid, M., & Menon, K. (2023, May). Brain Tumor Classification using Transfer Learning on Augmented Data and Visual Explanation using Grad-CAM. In 2023 7th International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Control Systems (ICICCS) (pp. 965-971). IEEE.
50. Lee, M. S., Flammer, A. J., Lerman, L. O., & Lerman, A. (2012). Personalized medicine in cardiovascular diseases. Korean circulation journal, 42(9), 583-591.
51. Lee, S., Lam, S. H., Rocha, T. A. H., Fleischman, R. J., Staton, C. A., Taylor, R., & Limkakeng, A. T. (2021). Machine learning and precision medicine in emergency medicine: the basics. Cureus, 13(9).
52. Lorensia, A. (2022). Knowledge and perception of self-medication of cough medication in pedicab drivers in surabaya. Indonesian Journal of Pharmaceutical Science and Technology, 9(3), 159. https://doi.org/10.24198/ijpst.v9i3.33003
53. Lu, S. C., Swisher, C. L., Chung, C., Jaffray, D., & Sidey-Gibbons, C. (2023). On the importance of interpretable machine learning predictions to inform clinical decision making in oncology. Frontiers in Oncology, 13, 1129380.
54. Luque-Fernandez, M. A., Redondo-Sánchez, D., & Maringe, C. (2019). cvauroc: Command to compute the cross-validated area under the curve for ROC analysis after predictive modeling for binary outcomes. The Stata Journal, 19(3), 615-625.
55. MacDonell, K., Gibson-Scipio, W., Lam, P., Naar-King, S., & Chen, X. (2012). Text messaging to measure asthma medication use and symptoms in urban African American emerging adults: a feasibility study. Journal of Asthma, 49(10), 1092-1096.
56. Mali, S. B., & Dahivelkar, S. (2024). Cancer management in terms of precision oncology. Oral Oncology, 148, 106658.
57. Martínez-García, M., & Hernández-Lemus, E. (2022). Data integration challenges for machine learning in precision medicine. Frontiers in medicine, 8, 784455.
58. Mathur, S., & Sutton, J. (2017). Personalized medicine could transform healthcare. Biomedical reports, 7(1), 3–5.
59. Mesquita, F., & Marques, G. (2024). An explainable machine learning approach for automated medical decision support of heart disease. Data & Knowledge Engineering, 102339.
60. Minssen, T., Rajam, N., & Bogers, M. (2020). Clinical trial data transparency and GDPR compliance: Implications for data sharing and open innovation. Science and Public Policy, 47(5), 616-626.
61. Moon, H., Tran, L., Lee, A., Kwon, T., & Lee, M. (2024). Prediction of Treatment Recommendations Via Ensemble Machine Learning Algorithms for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients in Personalized Medicine. Cancer Informatics, 23, 11769351241272397.
62. Morrison, M., & Prainsack, B. (2022). Responsible Personalised Medicine: Exploring the Ethical, Legal, Social, Political and Economic Issues of Manufacturing, Distribution, Access and Reimbursement. A Report by the Future Targeted Healthcare Manufacturing Hub.
63. Muhammad, D., & Bendechache, M. (2024). Unveiling the black box: A systematic review of Explainable Artificial Intelligence in medical image analysis. Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal.
64. Murdoch, W. J., Singh, C., Kumbier, K., Abbasi-Asl, R., & Yu, B. (2019). Interpretable machine learning: definitions, methods, and applications. arXiv preprint arXiv:1901.04592.
65. Nahiduzzaman, M., Abdulrazak, L. F., Ayari, M. A., Khandakar, A., & Islam, S. R. (2024). A novel framework for lung cancer classification using lightweight convolutional neural networks and ridge extreme learning machine model with SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP). Expert Systems with Applications, 248, 123392.
66. Nasarian, E., Alizadehsani, R., Acharya, U. R., & Tsui, K. L. (2024). Designing interpretable ML system to enhance healthcare trust: A systematic review to proposed responsible clinician-AI-collaboration framework. Information Fusion, 102412.
67. Nasir, S., Khan, R. A., & Bai, S. (2024). Ethical framework for harnessing the power of ai in healthcare and beyond. IEEE Access, 12, 31014-31035.
68. Obijuru, A., Arowoogun, J. O., Onwumere, C., Odilibe, I. P., Anyanwu, E. C., & Daraojimba, A. I. (2024). Big data analytics in healthcare: a review of recent advances and potential for personalized medicine. International Medical Science Research Journal, 4(2), 170-182.
69. Park, Y. (2022). Personalized risk-based screening design for comparative two-arm group sequential clinical trials. Journal of Personalized Medicine, 12(3), 448.
70. Prainsack, B. (2023). Sociologies of precision medicine. In A. Petersen (Ed.), Handbook on the sociology of health and medicine (pp. 439–454). Edward Elgar Publishing.
71. Raiesi, A., Hashemi-Shahri, S. M., Gouya, M. M., Ansari-Moghaddam, A., Shahraki-Sanavi, F., Mohammadi, M., … & Farmanfarma, K. K. (2019). The experiences of mobile populations about malaria control in southeastern iran using the pen-3 cultural model: a qualitative study. Health Scope, 8(3). https://doi.org/10.5812/jhealthscope.81615
72. Rajam, N. (2020). Policy strategies for personalizing medicine “in the data moment”. Health Policy and Technology, 9(3), 379-383.
73. Ramos, E., Callier, S. L., & Rotimi, C. N. (2012). Why personalized medicine will fail if we stay the course. Personalized medicine, 9(8), 839–847.
74. Reza Soroushmehr, S. M., & Najarian, K. (2016). Transforming big data into computational models for personalized medicine and health care. Dialogues in clinical neuroscience, 18(3), 339-343.
75. Robinson, A., O’Brien, N., Sile, L., Guraya, H. K., Govind, T., Harris, V., … & Husband, A. (2022). Recommendations for community pharmacy to improve access to medication advice for people from ethnic minority communities: a qualitative person-centered co-design study. Health Expectations, 25(6), 3040-3052. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.13611
76. Sadeghi, Z., Alizadehsani, R., CIFCI, M. A., Kausar, S., Rehman, R., Mahanta, P., … & Pardalos, P. M. (2024). A review of Explainable Artificial Intelligence in healthcare. Computers and Electrical Engineering, 118, 109370.
77. Salahuddin, Z., Woodruff, H. C., Chatterjee, A., & Lambin, P. (2022). Transparency of deep neural networks for medical image analysis: A review of interpretability methods. Computers in biology and medicine, 140, 105111.
78. Scheibner, J., Raisaro, J. L., Troncoso-Pastoriza, J. R., Ienca, M., Fellay, J., Vayena, E., & Hubaux, J. P. (2021). Revolutionizing medical data sharing using advanced privacy-enhancing technologies: technical, legal, and ethical synthesis. Journal of medical Internet research, 23(2), e25120.
79. Selvaraju, R. R., Das, A., Vedantam, R., Cogswell, M., Parikh, D., & Batra, D. (2016). Grad-CAM: Gradient-weighted Class Activation Mapping. Arxiv.
80. Shemie, G., Nguyen, M. T., Wallenburg, J., Ratjen, F., & Knoppers, B. M. (2021). The equitable implementation of cystic fibrosis personalized medicines in Canada. Journal of Personalized Medicine, 11(5), 382.
81. Steyerberg, E. W., & Vergouwe, Y. (2014). Towards better clinical prediction models: seven steps for development and an ABCD for validation. European heart journal, 35(29), 1925-1931.
82. Talaat, F. M., Gamel, S. A., El-Balka, R. M., Shehata, M., & ZainEldin, H. (2024). Grad-CAM Enabled Breast Cancer Classification with a 3D Inception-ResNet V2: Empowering Radiologists with Explainable Insights. Cancers, 16(21), 3668.
83. Tang, A. S., Woldemariam, S. R., Miramontes, S., Norgeot, B., Oskotsky, T. T., & Sirota, M. (2024). Harnessing EHR data for health research. Nature Medicine, 30(7), 1847-1855.
84. Tarkkala, H., Helén, I., & Snell, K. (2019). From health to wealth: The future of personalized medicine in the making. Futures, 109, 142-152.
85. Torres‐Padilla, M. E., Bredenoord, A. L., Jongsma, K. R., Lunkes, A., Marelli, L., Pinheiro, I., & Testa, G. (2020). Thinking “ethical” when designing an international, cross‐disciplinary biomedical research consortium. The EMBO Journal, 39(19), e105725.
86. Vallée, A. (2024). Envisioning the Future of Personalized Medicine: Role and Realities of Digital Twins. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 26, e50204.
87. Vidyadhari Chinta, S., Wang, Z., Zhang, X., Doan Viet, T., Kashif, A., Antoinette Smith, M., & Zhang, W. (2024). AI-Driven Healthcare: A Survey on Ensuring Fairness and Mitigating Bias. arXiv e-prints, arXiv-2407.
88. Vlachothanasi, E. (2024). Navigating Precision Medicine Within European Law: Ethical Considerations and Legal Challenges. Bioethica, 10(2), 22-37.
89. Wang, R. C., & Wang, Z. (2023). Precision Medicine: Disease Subtyping and Tailored Treatment. Cancers, 15(15), 3837.
90. Wang, Y. (2024). A comparative analysis of model agnostic techniques for explainable artificial intelligence. Research Reports on Computer Science, 25-33.
91. Westerhuis, J. A., Hoefsloot, H. C., Smit, S., Vis, D. J., Smilde, A. K., van Velzen, E. J., … & van Dorsten, F. A. (2008). Assessment of PLSDA cross validation. Metabolomics, 4, 81-89.
92. Whicher, D., Ahmed, M., Siddiqui, S., Adams, I., Grossman, C., & Carman, K. (2020). Health data sharing to support better outcomes. Washington, DC: National Academy of Medicine.
93. Yang, Y., Mei, G., & Piccialli, F. (2022). A deep learning approach considering image background for pneumonia identification using explainable ai (XAI). IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics.
94. Zenker, S., Strech, D., Ihrig, K., Jahns, R., Müller, G., Schickhardt, C., … & Drepper, J. (2022). Data protection-compliant broad consent for secondary use of health care data and human bio-samples for (bio) medical research: Towards a new German national standard. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 131, 104096.