Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41584223›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in artificial intelligence2025

Multimodal graph neural networks in healthcare: a review of fusion strategies across biomedical domains.

Maria Vaida, Ziyuan Huang

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Maria VaidaDepartment of Analytics, Harrisburg University of Science and Technology, Harrisburg, PA, United States.
Ziyuan HuangDepartment of Emergency Medicine, UMass Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have transformed multimodal healthcare data integration by capturing complex, non-Euclidean relationships across diverse sources such as electronic health records, medical imaging, genomic profiles, and clinical notes. This review synthesizes GNN applications in healthcare, highlighting their impact on clinical decision-making through multimodal integration, advanced fusion strategies, and attention mechanisms. Key applications include drug interaction and discovery, cancer detection and prognosis, clinical status prediction, infectious disease modeling, genomics, and the diagnosis of mental health and neurological disorders. Various GNN architectures demonstrate consistent applications in modeling both intra- and intermodal relationships. GNN architectures, such as Graph Convolutional Networks and Graph Attention Networks, are integrated with Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs), transformer-based models, temporal encoders, and optimization algorithms to facilitate robust multimodal integration. Early, intermediate, late, and hybrid fusion strategies, enhanced by attention mechanisms like multi-head attention, enable dynamic prioritization of critical relationships, improving accuracy and interpretability. However, challenges remain, including data heterogeneity, computational demands, and the need for greater interpretability. Addressing these challenges presents opportunities to advance GNN adoption in medicine through scalable, transparent GNN models.

Indexed as

attention mechanismsbiomedical data integrationcancer prognosisdrug discoverygraph neural networkshealthcare applicationsmultimodal fusionneurological disorders

Identifiers

PMID41584223
PMCPMC12827511

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.