-
CiteScore
0.40
Impact Factor
Volume 1, Issue 1, Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Bioinformatics
Volume 1, Issue 1, 2025
Submit Manuscript Edit a Special Issue
Article QR Code
Article QR Code
Scan the QR code for reading
Popular articles
Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Bioinformatics, Volume 1, Issue 1, 2025: 30-40

Open Access | Research Article | 29 June 2025
Role of Social Factors in the Adoption of AI-Driven Personalized Healthcare
1 Faculty of Social Sciences, Tampere University, FI-33100 Tampere, Finland
2 Cybex IT Group, Faisalabad 38000, Pakistan
3 Shenzhen Institute of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen 518055, China
* Corresponding Author: Saba Aslam, [email protected]
Received: 07 March 2025, Accepted: 30 May 2025, Published: 29 June 2025  
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming personalized medicine through its potential. However, implementing AI-driven healthcare solutions remains inconsistent because of certain social factors, i.e., cultural beliefs, trust issues, and major accessibility elements. This study focuses on the key social determinants involved in the acceptance and implementation of AI-driven medicine, with a prime focus on hurdles such as algorithmic bias, transparency issues, and public skepticism. A quantitative approach was employed in the research, and survey data were collected among healthcare professionals, policymakers, and patients. Statistical analyses were performed, including chi-square tests and multiple regression modeling. It examined relationships between social factors and AI adoption rates. The findings presented that familiarity with AI positively influences its acceptance However, the concerns about non-transparent algorithms and cultural resistance continue to hinder its adoption. Nearly 48% of respondents exhibited low attitudes toward AI-driven healthcare. On the other hand, 68% showed concerns about data security. Furthermore, socioeconomic disparities impact accessibility to a great extent, with lower-income groups reporting limited exposure to AI-powered medical solutions. The study also identified transparency as both a facilitator and a barrier, with clinicians hesitant to rely on AI systems due to the lack of explainability. Addressing all these barriers through targeted education, trust-building initiatives, and ethical oversight can increase the equitable integration of AI-driven personalized medicine in diverse settings of healthcare settings.

Graphical Abstract
Role of Social Factors in the Adoption of AI-Driven Personalized Healthcare

Keywords
personalized medicine
AI adoption factors
healthcare
trust AI

Data Availability Statement
Data will be made available on request.

Funding
This work was supported without any funding.

Conflicts of Interest
Fiza Aslam and Muhammad Aftab Ur Rehman are employees of Cybex IT Group, Faisalabad 38000, Pakistan.

Ethical Approval and Consent to Participate
Not applicable.

References
  1. Topol, E. (2019). Deep medicine: how artificial intelligence can make healthcare human again. Hachette UK.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Jiang, F., Jiang, Y., Zhi, H., Dong, Y., Li, H., Ma, S., ... & Wang, Y. (2017). Artificial intelligence in healthcare: past, present and future. Stroke and vascular neurology, 2(4).
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  3. Laï, M. C., Brian, M., & Mamzer, M. F. (2020). Perceptions of artificial intelligence in healthcare: findings from a qualitative survey study among actors in France. Journal of translational medicine, 18, 1-13.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  4. Adithyan, N., Chowdhury, R. R., Padmavathy, L., Peter, R. M., & Anantharaman, V. V. (2024). Perception of the Adoption of Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare Practices Among Healthcare Professionals in a Tertiary Care Hospital: A Cross-Sectional Study. Cureus, 16(9), e69910.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  5. Hassan, M., Kushniruk, A., & Borycki, E. (2024). Barriers to and facilitators of artificial intelligence adoption in health care: scoping review. JMIR Human Factors, 11, e48633.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  6. Davenport, T., & Kalakota, R. (2019). The potential for artificial intelligence in healthcare. Future healthcare journal, 6(2), 94-98.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  7. Taddeo, M., & Floridi, L. (2018). How AI can be a force for good. Science, 361(6404), 751-752.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  8. Mittelstadt, B. D., Allo, P., Taddeo, M., Wachter, S., & Floridi, L. (2016). The ethics of algorithms: Mapping the debate. Big Data & Society, 3(2), 2053951716679679.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  9. Amann, J., Blasimme, A., Vayena, E., Frey, D., Madai, V. I., & Precise4Q Consortium. (2020). Explainability for artificial intelligence in healthcare: a multidisciplinary perspective. BMC medical informatics and decision making, 20, 1-9.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  10. Shameer, K., Johnson, K. W., Glicksberg, B. S., Dudley, J. T., & Sengupta, P. P. (2018). Machine learning in cardiovascular medicine: are we there yet?. Heart, 104(14), 1156-1164.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  11. Obermeyer, Z., Powers, B., Vogeli, C., & Mullainathan, S. (2019). Dissecting racial bias in an algorithm used to manage the health of populations. Science, 366(6464), 447-453.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  12. Chen, I. Y., Joshi, S., & Ghassemi, M. (2020). Treating health disparities with artificial intelligence. Nature medicine, 26(1), 16-17.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  13. Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2014). The second machine age: Work, progress, and prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies. WW Norton & company.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS quarterly, 425-478.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  15. Beets, B., Newman, T. P., Howell, E. L., Bao, L., & Yang, S. (2023). Surveying public perceptions of artificial intelligence in health care in the United States: systematic review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 25, e40337.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  16. Gerke, S., Minssen, T., & Cohen, G. (2020). Ethical and legal challenges of artificial intelligence-driven healthcare. In Artificial intelligence in healthcare (pp. 295-336). Academic Press.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  17. Adadi, A., & Berrada, M. (2018). Peeking inside the black box A survey on explainable artificial intelligence (XAI). IEEE Access, 6, 52138–52160.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  18. Ribeiro, M. T., Singh, S., & Guestrin, C. (2016, August). `` Why should i trust you?'' Explaining the predictions of any classifier. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining (pp. 1135-1144).
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  19. Chen, I., Johansson, F. D., & Sontag, D. (2018). Why is my classifier discriminatory?. Advances in neural information processing systems, 31.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  20. McMahan, B., Moore, E., Ramage, D., Hampson, S., & y Arcas, B. A. (2017, April). Communication-efficient learning of deep networks from decentralized data. In Artificial intelligence and statistics (pp. 1273-1282). PMLR.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Rajkomar, A., Dean, J., & Kohane, I. (2019). Machine learning in medicine. New England Journal of Medicine, 380(14), 1347-1358.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  22. Rajkomar, A., Hardt, M., Howell, M. D., Corrado, G., & Chin, M. H. (2018). Ensuring fairness in machine learning to advance health equity. Annals of internal medicine, 169(12), 866-872.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  23. Dhagarra, D., Goswami, M., & Kumar, G. (2020). Impact of trust and privacy concerns on technology acceptance in healthcare: an Indian perspective. International journal of medical informatics, 141, 104164.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  24. Floridi, L., Cowls, J., Beltrametti, M., Chatila, R., Chazerand, P., Dignum, V., ... & Vayena, E. (2018). AI4People—an ethical framework for a good AI society: opportunities, risks, principles, and recommendations. Minds and machines, 28, 689-707.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  25. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Algorithmic transparency recording standard - guidance for public sector bodies. (2023, January 5). GOV.UK. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/guidance-for-organisations-using-the-algorithmic-transparency-recording-standard/algorithmic-transparency-recording-standard-guidance-for-public-sector-bodies
    [Google Scholar]

Cite This Article
APA Style
Nadeem, M., Aslam, F., Rehman, M. A. U., & Aslam, S. (2025). Role of Social Factors in the Adoption of AI-Driven Personalized Healthcare. Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Bioinformatics, 1(1), 30–40. https://doi.org/10.62762/JAIB.2025.345522

Article Metrics
Citations:

Crossref

0

Scopus

0

Web of Science

0
Article Access Statistics:
Views: 36
PDF Downloads: 17

Publisher's Note
ICCK stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions
CC BY Copyright © 2025 by the Author(s). Published by Institute of Central Computation and Knowledge. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made.
Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Bioinformatics

Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Bioinformatics

ISSN: request pending (Online)

Email: [email protected]

Portico

Portico

All published articles are preserved here permanently:
https://www.portico.org/publishers/icck/