Blockchain Applications in Health Care and Public Health: Increased Transparency (Preprint)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
<sec> <title>BACKGROUND</title> Although big data and smart technologies allow for the development of precision medicine and predictive models in health care, there are still several challenges that need to be addressed before the full potential of these data can be realized (eg, data sharing and interoperability issues, lack of massive genomic data sets, data ownership, and security and privacy of health data). Health companies are exploring the use of blockchain, a tamperproof and distributed digital ledger, to address some of these challenges. </sec> <sec> <title>OBJECTIVE</title> In this viewpoint, we aim to obtain an overview of blockchain solutions that aim to solve challenges in health care from an industry perspective, focusing on solutions developed by health and technology companies. </sec> <sec> <title>METHODS</title> We conducted a literature review following the protocol defined by Levac et al to analyze the findings in a systematic manner. In addition to traditional databases such as IEEE and PubMed, we included search and news outlets such as CoinDesk, CoinTelegraph, and Medium. </sec> <sec> <title>RESULTS</title> Health care companies are using blockchain to improve challenges in five key areas. For electronic health records, blockchain can help to mitigate interoperability and data sharing in the industry by creating an overarching mechanism to link disparate personal records and can stimulate data sharing by connecting owners and buyers directly. For the drug (and food) supply chain, blockchain can provide an auditable log of a product’s provenance and transportation (including information on the conditions in which the product was transported), increasing transparency and eliminating counterfeit products in the supply chain. For health insurance, blockchain can facilitate the claims management process and help users to calculate medical and pharmaceutical benefits. For genomics, by connecting data buyers and owners directly, blockchain can offer a secure and auditable way of sharing genomic data, increasing their availability. For consent management, as all participants in a blockchain network view an immutable version of the truth, blockchain can provide an immutable and timestamped log of consent, increasing transparency in the consent management process. </sec> <sec> <title>CONCLUSIONS</title> Blockchain technology can improve several challenges faced by the health care industry. However, companies must evaluate how the features of blockchain can affect their systems (eg, the append-only nature of blockchain limits the deletion of data stored in the network, and distributed systems, although more secure, are less efficient). Although these trade-offs need to be considered when viewing blockchain solutions, the technology has the potential to optimize processes, minimize inefficiencies, and increase trust in all contexts covered in this viewpoint. </sec> <sec> <title>CLINICALTRIAL</title> <p/> </sec>
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».