Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41880635›Full record

ReviewJMIR AI2026

Fuzzy Logic Approaches for Causal Inference in Health Care: Systematic Review.

Jaime Jamett, Patricio Melendez, Ximena Collao-Ferrada, Karina Cordero-Torres, Alejandro Veloz

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JMIR AI, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

5 authors.

Jaime Jamett *Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs, Universidad de Valparaíso, Blanco 951, Valparaíso, 2340000, Chile, 56 962069194.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0006-1610-843X
Patricio Melendez *PhD Program in Sciences and Engineering for Health, Universidad de Valparaíso, Valparaíso, Chile.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6967-8643
Ximena Collao-Ferrada *PhD Program in Sciences and Engineering for Health, Universidad de Valparaíso, Valparaíso, Chile.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1782-2006
Karina Cordero-Torres *PhD Program in Sciences and Engineering for Health, Universidad de Valparaíso, Valparaíso, Chile.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0825-2520
Alejandro Veloz *PhD Program in Sciences and Engineering for Health, Universidad de Valparaíso, Valparaíso, Chile.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9394-6660

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Fuzzy logic has been progressively investigated as a viable alternative to traditional statistical and machine learning methods in health care modeling, especially in environments marked by uncertainty, nonlinearity, and missing information. Although its use in prediction, classification, and risk stratification is well established, its application to explicit causal inference remains limited, varied, and methodologically premature. Objective: This systematic review aimed to examine how fuzzy logic frameworks have been used to address causal questions in health care, focusing on their methodological characteristics, comparative performance, and degree of integration with formal causal inference approaches. Methods: A systematic search across 6 databases (PubMed, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, SpringerLink, Scopus, and IEEE Xplore) identified peer-reviewed studies published between 2014 and 2025 that applied fuzzy modeling in health care settings with explicit or implicit causal objectives. The review adhered to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020 guidelines and used a modified PICO (population, intervention, comparator, and outcome) framework for study selection. Data were extracted on the health care domain, fuzzy method, comparator use, and causal framing. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist and the PROBAST+AI tool, according to study design. Results: A total of 37 studies met the inclusion criteria. The most frequently applied approaches were fuzzy inference systems, fuzzy cognitive maps, and neuro-fuzzy models, with applications spanning infectious diseases, cancer, cardiovascular health, mental health, and occupational health. Fourteen studies included comparator models; among these, 5 reported superior performance of fuzzy approaches, 3 showed comparable results, and 6 lacked sufficient detail for a robust comparison. Only 2 studies explicitly implemented formal causal inference frameworks, while most relied on predictive or associative modeling with implicit causal assumptions. Overall, the risk of bias was moderate to high. Conclusions: Fuzzy logic offers interpretability and flexibility well suited to complex health care problems, yet its application to explicit causal inference remains fragmented. Greater methodological transparency, systematic benchmarking, and integration with formal causal designs-such as counterfactual and target trial frameworks-are required to establish fuzzy logic as a robust paradigm for causal inference in health care.

Indexed as

causalityclinical decision-makingdelivery of health carefuzzy logichealth information systems

Identifiers

PMID41880635
PMCPMC13016549

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.