Aug 2026· International Journal of Medical Informatics· Vol 221, pp.
106672
· 0 citations· 41 references
Medicine
TL;DR
This systematic review provides empirical evidence suggesting that contemporary AI systems in healthcare introduce privacy and security risks that may challenge traditional assumptions about data protection, and underscores the need for privacy- and security-by-design approaches and governance frameworks that address risks across the AI lifecycle.
Abstract
Background
Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly integrated into healthcare information systems, supporting clinical decision-making, imaging analysis, and predictive modeling. While these applications offer operational and clinical benefits, they also introduce emerging risks to patient privacy, data security, and system reliability.
Objective
To systematically review empirical evidence on privacy breaches, security vulnerabilities, and misuse associated with AI applications in healthcare settings.
Methods
PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, IEEE Xplore, and ACM Digital Library were searched for empirical studies published between January 2015 and November 2025 that evaluated AI use or misuse in clinical diagnosis, treatment, or decision-making. Two reviewers independently screened studies and extracted data using a standardized form. Findings were synthesized narratively due to heterogeneity in study designs, AI methods, and reported outcomes.
Results
Of 7,285 records identified through database searches and 205 through citation screening, 22 empirical studies met the inclusion criteria, spanning multiple clinical domains and data modalities, predominantly medical imaging applications. Five recurring threat categories were identified: patient re-identification, membership inference, unauthorized access and adversarial exploitation, input manipulation, and misuse or overinterpretation of AI outputs. Across studies, AI models were shown to encode latent biometric signals across diverse data types, limiting the effectiveness of traditional anonymization and synthetic data approaches. Adversarial attacks and input manipulation were also shown to compromise diagnostic performance and system integrity.
Conclusion
This systematic review provides empirical evidence suggesting that contemporary AI systems in healthcare introduce privacy and security risks that may challenge traditional assumptions about data protection. These findings underscore the need for privacy- and security-by-design approaches and governance frameworks that address risks across the AI lifecycle.
The review concludes that healthcare AI should be evaluated as a sociotechnical intervention rather than a standalone algorithm, and sustainable value depends on prospective validation, equity auditing, cybersecurity-by-design, economic evaluation, transparent reporting, and continuous post-deployment monitoring.
Anastasia Andrevna, Druv Juel· International Journal of Art...· 0 citations
This review critically and systematically maps applications of PETs across the biomedical AI lifecycle in accordance with PRISMA-ScR guidelines and evaluates their technical trade-offs, deployment feasibility, and residual risks.
Seha Ay, Umit Topaloglu, Wei Zhang· Frontiers in Digital Health· 0 citations
This scoping review examined the ethical and regulatory issues surrounding AI-enabled SaMD across jurisdictions and across the product lifecycle, drawing together peer-reviewed literature, standards, and official guidance.
Shaharyar Ahsan, Vivian Annastasia Chinyem Obi, Danish Noor et al.· Clinical Therapeutics· 0 citations
Current evaluations emphasize accuracy while underreporting privacy, security, robustness, explainability, and verifiability, underscoring the need for comprehensive, guideline-based, multidomain evaluation before deployment in high-stakes clinical settings.
Hikaru Matsuoka, Takayuki Takahashi, Takayuki Semitsu et al.· Online Journal of Public Hea...· 0 citations
AI demonstrates strong potential to improve the effectiveness, safety, and quality of healthcare, however, broader clinical adoption remains constrained by regulatory requirements, interpretability gaps, data quality issues, and workflow integration challenges, underscoring the need for stronger validation practices an...
Ghulam Hussain Noori, Shaista Bibi, Seung Won Lee· Inquiry : a journal of medic...· 0 citations
Substantial, persistent trustworthy AI reporting gaps exist in FDA documentation, and standardised, audit-ready reporting across the AI lifecycle is needed to support independent assessment and responsible adoption of healthcare AI.
Ahmed M. A. Salih, Oliver Díaz, Alejandro Guzmán et al.· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.