Next Article in Journal
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-Related Sjögren’s Syndrome: An Ocular Immune-Related Adverse Event
Previous Article in Journal
Computed Tomography, Coronary Angiography, and Intravascular Ultrasound in the Diagnosis of Left Anterior Descending Stenosis in a 38-Year-Old Woman with a Calcium Score of Zero
Previous Article in Special Issue
Towards Parkinson’s Disease Detection Through Analysis of Everyday Handwriting
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Editorial

Editorial for the Special Issue “Medical Data Processing and Analysis—2nd Edition”

1
Faculty of Electrical Engineering & Technology, Campus Pauh Putra, Universiti Malaysia Perlis, Arau 02600, Malaysia
2
Advanced Computing (AdvComp), Centre of Excellence (CoE), Universiti Malaysia Perlis, Arau 02600, Malaysia
3
Department of Biomedical Systems and Informatics Engineering, Yarmouk University, Irbid 21163, Jordan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Diagnostics 2025, 15(9), 1170; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics15091170
Submission received: 29 April 2025 / Accepted: 2 May 2025 / Published: 4 May 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Medical Data Processing and Analysis—2nd Edition)
Medical data processing and analysis have become central to advancements in healthcare, driven largely by the need for accurate diagnosis, personalized treatment, and efficient healthcare system management [1,2,3]. A major trend in this domain is addressing the limitations of insufficient quality data through human-in-the-loop (HITL) approaches [4], explainable AI (XAI) frameworks [5], and blockchain-based security models [6]. Current expansions in machine learning, computer vision, and edge computing have significantly impacted the early detection and diagnosis of various types of diseases [7,8,9,10,11]. Many studies demonstrate innovative applicable approaches to neurological disorders, infectious diseases, developmental conditions, and medical image retrieval.
On the other hand, Tur [12] introduced a multi-modal machine learning framework for identifying COVID-19 utilizing a combination of many biochemical biomarkers and chest X-ray imaging. The proposed hybrid model combines data from both sources, and ensemble learning was employed to enhance its diagnostic accuracy over single-modality approaches. The study emphasized the impact of multimodal data fusion when concentrating on heterogeneous manifestations of infectious diseases. However, Jeon et al. [13] surveyed machine learning and explainable AI (XAI) for the dependable diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in pediatric patients. They developed neurodevelopmental features and behavioral assessments for building a high-performance diagnostic model. Prominently, utilizing XAI modified the interpretation, and the assessments were shown to be appropriate for clinical adoption by enhancing trustable models. In contrast, Gasmi et al. [14] investigated the enhancement of medical image retrieval by incorporating Unified Medical Language System (UMLS) concepts with a convolutional neural network (CNN)-based text indexing method. Their proposed system develops semantics that recognize medical reports and can combine these semantics with related images. Their recommended approach fills the gap between clinical language and image databases, assisting image retrieval precisely in clinical decision support systems.
Mosqueira-Rey et al. [15] emphasized the role of HITL in overcoming data bottlenecks in deep learning models for pancreatic cancer treatment, combining synthetic data augmentation using generative adversarial networks (GANs) and expert feedback through active learning. Together, these works highlight an increasing focus on privacy-preserving models and patient acceptance, though obstacles such as encryption overheads and equitable technology access persist. Singh and Mantri [16] similarly focused on improving preprocessing and feature selection strategies via Rough Set Theory (RST) to optimize data dimensionality, enhancing the performance of clinical decision support systems (CDSS). Hussain and Mishra [17] demonstrated the application of AI and big data in COVID-19 diagnosis, employing deep learning on medical images amid data scarcity challenges. Collectively, these studies underscore that while data augmentation and expert integration help mitigate data limitations, complexities in model integration and data quality assurance remain persistent issues. Parallel to data-centric innovations, patient trust and data security have emerged as critical considerations. Paccoud et al. [18] explored patient perspectives on adopting digital medical devices (DMDs) for Parkinson’s disease management, finding a general willingness tempered by demographic differences. Addressing confidentiality concerns, Affum and Enchill [19] introduced a division-free gradient descent multivariate regression approach to encrypted medical data, ensuring secure machine learning without exposing sensitive patient information.
Advancements in electronic medical record (EMR) processing have also demonstrated strong potential but revealed dependencies on robust feature extraction and explainable model structures. Pham et al. [20] developed a validated case definition for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) using a tree-based ensemble, identifying XGBoost as particularly effective for generating interpretable outcomes suitable for primary care. Singh and Mantri [16] achieved improved classification for diseases like breast cancer and thyroid disorders through integrated machine learning models and advanced feature selection. Hussain and Mishra [17] similarly used convolutional neural networks and transfer learning to enhance COVID-19 diagnosis accuracy. Although these techniques produced promising results, their reliance on structured datasets limits their real-world applicability, where data heterogeneity is common. Alongside technical challenges, interpretability and ethical concerns have come to the forefront. Hakkoum et al. [21] conducted a comprehensive evaluation of interpretability techniques for supervised machine learning models, emphasizing the tension between model transparency and performance in medical applications. Hossain et al. echoed this concern, noting healthcare professionals’ hesitancy to adopt deep neural networks (DNNs) due to their “black-box” nature, thus advocating for stronger development of XAI methods. Shakhovska et al. [22] proposed a hybrid XAI system combining multiple neural network architectures to improve interpretability and clinical relevance, suggesting a promising avenue toward balancing performance and transparency.
Ethical challenges in AI-driven healthcare also involve the heavy reliance on statistical generalizations rather than individualized patient evidence. Holm [23] argued that AI systems based solely on statistical estimations can lead to ethical dilemmas in resource allocation, resonating with critiques from Hakkoum et al. [21] and Hossain et al. [24] regarding the need for more trustworthy, context-sensitive AI models. While statistical models may provide transparency, they often lack the nuanced sensitivity to handle complex biological variations, highlighting a need for future models that integrate statistical clarity with deep learning capabilities.
From a practical application standpoint, machine learning has been increasingly utilized to predict healthcare outcomes and optimize system behaviors. Park et al. [25] illustrated this by predicting the closure of medical and dental clinics using administrative health insurance data combined with Support Vector Machines (SVMs), Random Forests (RF), and Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost). Similarly, Maheshwari et al. [26] applied machine learning and blockchain technologies to predict transaction types within healthcare systems, advancing decentralized healthcare data management. Security, data integrity, and system optimization have become key priorities in handling decentralized medical data. Khan et al. [27] highlighted the importance of blockchain in facilitating secure communications among heterogeneous medical devices integrated through AI-enabled machine learning models.
Karthiyayini et al. [28] addressed challenges in the secure transmission of medical image data by proposing the Enhanced Model for Medical Image Data Security (EM-MIDS), incorporating machine learning approaches such as K-Means Clustering (KMC) and Random Forest (RF) for classification, supported by Support Vector Machine (SVM) for security evaluation. The integration of chaotic maps and channel-based methodologies added robustness to the encryption–decryption framework. Comparative studies suggested EM-MIDS’s superiority over existing models, particularly concerning data accuracy and privacy integrity. Meanwhile, Alyahyan [29] introduced a Transformer-based Attention-Guided CNN (TAGCNN) for disease diagnosis, achieving notable improvements in accuracy compared to conventional models like ResNet50, AlexNet, and DenseNet169. While both studies demonstrated the growing efficacy of machine learning in medical imaging, a potential limitation is the narrow focus on specific datasets, such as benchmark medical images or osteoporosis X-rays, which may limit generalizability across broader clinical applications.
Machine learning’s application in triaging outpatient care through heterogeneous data further illustrates the transformative potential of automated systems. Salman et al. [30] developed an early triage prediction model using multiple machine learning algorithms, such as SVM, Random Forest, Decision Tree, Logistic Regression, Naive Bayes, and K-Nearest Neighbor, with Decision Tree algorithms achieving the highest performance of 93.5%. That study emphasized the importance of integrating diverse Internet of Medical Things (IoMT) data, including ECG, blood pressure, and SpO2 measurements, into patient assessment processes. Complementing this, Kural et al. [31] explored the application of supervised and unsupervised learning methods like Sammon mapping and Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) for identifying anaphylaxis in claims databases. Their findings highlighted the value of automated feature selection pipelines for refining disease identification algorithms, particularly in settings where ground truth data are sparse or varied. However, both research efforts acknowledged the complexity of handling heterogeneous medical datasets, often complicated by inconsistencies in data quality and format, underlining a need for more robust, adaptable models capable of handling real-world clinical variability. The challenge of generalization in artificial intelligence (AI) models for healthcare remains significant, particularly when confronting biases intrinsic to training datasets. Ong Ly et al. [32] systematically investigated shortcut learning, where models inadvertently learn irrelevant patterns from biased data acquisition processes rather than genuine clinical features. Their development of PEst, a bias-corrected external accuracy estimator, significantly improved generalization assessments without requiring external datasets, reducing overestimation of model performance by an average of 20%.
In conclusion, medical data processing and analysis are rapidly advancing through human-in-the-loop approaches, privacy-preserving AI, blockchain-based security, and explainable machine learning frameworks. However, the field must address crucial challenges related to model generalizability, ethical considerations, patient trust, equitable access, and computational efficiency. Future research must prioritize interdisciplinary strategies that integrate technical innovation with patient-centered, transparent, and secure healthcare solutions to ensure AI-driven tools are both accurate and ethically sound.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, W.A.M. and H.A.; methodology, W.A.M.; software, W.A.M.; validation, W.A.M. and H.A.; formal analysis, H.A.; investigation, H.A.; resources, W.A.M.; data curation, H.A.; writing—original draft preparation, H.A.; writing—review and editing, W.A.M. and H.A.; visualization, H.A.; supervision, W.A.M.; project administration, W.A.M.; funding acquisition, W.A.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Yean, C.W.; Ahmad, W.K.W.; Mustafa, W.A.; Murugappan, M.; Rajamanickam, Y.; Adom, A.H.; Omar, M.I.; Zheng, B.S.; Junoh, A.K.; Razlan, Z.M.; et al. An emotion assessment of stroke patients by using bispectrum features of EEG signals. Brain Sci. 2020, 10, 672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Yin, P.; Yin, T.; Zhao, S.; Yu, S. Construction of a secure storage and sharing model for medical data under computer network technology. Appl. Math. Nonlinear Sci. 2024, 9, 888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Alsalatie, M.; Alquran, H.; Mustafa, W.A.; Mohd Yacob, Y.; Ali Alayed, A. Analysis of Cytology Pap Smear Images Based on Ensemble Deep Learning Approach. Diagnostics 2022, 12, 2756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Budd, S.; Robinson, E.C.; Kainz, B. A survey on active learning and human-in-the-loop deep learning for medical image analysis. Med. Image Anal. 2021, 71, 102062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. van der Velden, B.H.M.; Kuijf, H.J.; Gilhuijs, K.G.A.; Viergever, M.A. Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) in deep learning-based medical image analysis. Med. Image Anal. 2022, 79, 102470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Qu, J. Blockchain in medical informatics. J. Ind. Inf. Integr. 2022, 25, 100258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Schaefer, J.; Lehne, M.; Schepers, J.; Prasser, F.; Thun, S. The use of machine learning in rare diseases: A scoping review. Orphanet J. Rare Dis. 2020, 15, 145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Chittora, P.; Chaurasia, S.; Chakrabarti, P.; Kumawat, G.; Chakrabarti, T.; Leonowicz, Z.; Jasinski, M.; Jasinski, L.; Gono, R.; Jasinska, E.; et al. Prediction of Chronic Kidney Disease—A Machine Learning Perspective. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 17312–17334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Kaur, C.; Kumar, M.S.; Anjum, A.; Binda, M.B.; Mallu, M.R.; Ansari, M.S. Al Chronic Kidney Disease Prediction Using Machine Learning. J. Adv. Inf. Technol. 2023, 14, 384–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Mustafa, W.A.; Halim, A.; Jamlos, M.A.; Syed Idrus, Z.S. A Review: Pap Smear Analysis Based on Image Processing Approach. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2020, 1529, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Mustafa, W.A.B.W.; Yazid, H.; Yaacob, S.B.; Basah, S.N. Bin Blood vessel extraction using morphological operation for diabetic retinopathy. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE Region 10 Symposium, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 14–16 April 2014; pp. 208–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Tur, K. Multi-Modal Machine Learning Approach for COVID-19 Detection Using Biomarkers and X-Ray Imaging. Diagnostics 2024, 14, 2800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Jeon, I.; Kim, M.; So, D.; Kim, E.Y.; Nam, Y.; Kim, S.; Shim, S.; Kim, J.; Moon, J. Reliable Autism Spectrum Disorder Diagnosis for Pediatrics Using Machine Learning and Explainable AI. Diagnostics 2024, 14, 2504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Gasmi, K.; Ayadi, H.; Torjmen, M. Enhancing Medical Image Retrieval with UMLS-Integrated CNN-Based Text Indexing. Diagnostics 2024, 14, 1204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Mosqueira-Rey, E.; Hernández-Pereira, E.; Bobes-Bascarán, J.; Alonso-Ríos, D.; Pérez-Sánchez, A.; Fernández-Leal, Á.; Moret-Bonillo, V.; Vidal-Ínsua, Y.; Vázquez-Rivera, F. Addressing the data bottleneck in medical deep learning models using a human-in-the-loop machine learning approach. Neural Comput. Appl. 2024, 36, 2597–2616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Singh, K.N.; Mantri, J.K. Clinical decision support system based on RST with machine learning for medical data classification. Multimed. Tools Appl. 2024, 83, 39707–39730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Hussain, M.J.; Mishra, A. Transforming Public Health with AI and Big Data Deep Learning for COVID-19 Detection in Medical Imaging. J. Intell. Syst. Internet Things 2025, 16, 42–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Paccoud, I.; Valero, M.M.; Marín, L.C.; Bontridder, N.; Ibrahim, A.; Winkler, J.; Fomo, M.; Sapienza, S.; Khoury, F.; Corvol, J.-C.; et al. Patient perspectives on the use of digital medical devices and health data for AI-driven personalised medicine in Parkinson’s Disease. Front. Neurol. 2024, 15, 1453243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Affum, E.; Enchill, M. Data Confidentiality in Machine Learning: Exploring Multivariate Regression and Its Application on Encrypted Medical Data. SN Comput. Sci. 2024, 5, 335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Pham, A.N.Q.; Barber, C.E.H.; Drummond, N.; Jasper, L.; Klein, D.; Lindeman, C.; Widdifield, J.; Williamson, T.; Jones, C.A. Development and validation of a rheumatoid arthritis case definition: A machine learning approach using data from primary care electronic medical records. BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Mak. 2024, 24, 360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Hakkoum, H.; Idri, A.; Abnane, I. Global and local interpretability techniques of supervised machine learning black box models for numerical medical data. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 2024, 131, 107829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Shakhovska, N.; Shebeko, A.; Prykarpatskyy, Y. A novel explainable ai model for medical data analysis. J. Artif. Intell. Soft Comput. Res. 2024, 14, 121–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Holm, S. Data-driven decisions about individual patients: The case of medical AI. J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 2024, 30, 735–740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Hossain, M.D.I.; Zamzmi, G.; Mouton, P.R.; Salekin, M.D.S.; Sun, Y.; Goldgof, D. Explainable AI for Medical Data: Current Methods, Limitations, and Future Directions. ACM Comput. Surv. 2025, 57, 148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Park, Y.-T.; Kim, D.; Jeon, J.S.; Kim, K.G. Predictors of Medical and Dental Clinic Closure by Machine Learning Methods: Cross-Sectional Study Using Empirical Data. J. Med. Internet Res. 2024, 26, e46608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Maheshwari, S.; Jain, P.K.; Al-Sharify, N.T.; Ghosh, S.; Dubey, D.; Kaur, G. Medical data analysis and transaction type prediction using machine learning and blockchain technology. IET Blockchain 2025, 5, e70001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Khan, A.A.; Laghari, A.A.; Baqasah, A.M.; Bacarra, R.; Alroobaea, R.; Alsafyani, M.; Alsayaydeh, J.A.J. BDLT-IoMT—A novel architecture: SVM machine learning for robust and secure data processing in Internet of Medical Things with blockchain cybersecurity. J. Supercomput. 2025, 81, 271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Karthiyayini, S.; John Simon Christopher, J.; Sheik Arafat, I.; Syed Moomin, F.M.H. Enhanced Model for Medical Image Data Security Using Machine Learning. SN Comput. Sci. 2024, 5, 1103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Alyahyan, S. Applying machine learning classification techniques for disease diagnosis from medical imaging data using Transformer based Attention Guided CNN (TAGCNN). Multimed. Tools Appl. 2024, 83, 72861–72887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Salman, O.S.; Latiff, N.M.A.; Arifin, S.H.S.; Salman, O.H. Early Triage Prediction for Outpatient Care Based on Heterogeneous Medical Data Utilizing Machine Learning. Pertanika J. Sci. Technol. 2024, 32, 2343–2367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Kural, K.C.; Mazo, I.; Walderhaug, M.; Santana-Quintero, L.; Karagiannis, K.; Thompson, E.E.; Kelman, J.A.; Goud, R. Using machine learning to improve anaphylaxis case identification in medical claims data. JAMIA Open 2024, 7, ooae037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Ong Ly, C.; Unnikrishnan, B.; Tadic, T.; Patel, T.; Duhamel, J.; Kandel, S.; Moayedi, Y.; Brudno, M.; Hope, A.; Ross, H.; et al. Shortcut learning in medical AI hinders generalization: Method for estimating AI model generalization without external data. NPJ Digit. Med. 2024, 7, 124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Mustafa, W.A.; Alquran, H. Editorial for the Special Issue “Medical Data Processing and Analysis—2nd Edition”. Diagnostics 2025, 15, 1170. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics15091170

AMA Style

Mustafa WA, Alquran H. Editorial for the Special Issue “Medical Data Processing and Analysis—2nd Edition”. Diagnostics. 2025; 15(9):1170. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics15091170

Chicago/Turabian Style

Mustafa, Wan Azani, and Hiam Alquran. 2025. "Editorial for the Special Issue “Medical Data Processing and Analysis—2nd Edition”" Diagnostics 15, no. 9: 1170. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics15091170

APA Style

Mustafa, W. A., & Alquran, H. (2025). Editorial for the Special Issue “Medical Data Processing and Analysis—2nd Edition”. Diagnostics, 15(9), 1170. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics15091170

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop