MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3024823144 · doi:10.1109/access.2020.2994090

A Survey on Blockchain-Based Self-Sovereign Patient Identity in Healthcare

2020· article· en· W3024823144 on OpenAlexafffund
Bahar Houtan, Abdelhakim Hafid, Dimitrios Makrakis

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversité de Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsIdentity (music)Health careBlockchainMedical recordSovereigntyComputer scienceInformation privacyInternet privacyDigital identityComputer securityMedicineKnowledge managementAccess controlLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Convergence of physical and digital identity and integration of various individual records, such as patient data, into a united repository remains a serious challenge. On one hand, collecting relevant data can help clinicians, specialists and healthcare service providers to facilitate care for patients. On the other hand, Self-Sovereign identity and the right to control personal data comes into question, because patients do not handle their data explicitly. Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) is a novel method which would allow to securely record time-stamped data and enable patient-driven health and identity records. In this paper, we review the state-of-the-art in Blockchain (BC)-based self-sovereignty and patient data records in healthcare. Our motivation is to investigate the potential of BC technology for use in the patient data and identity management. As a distributed decentralized technology, BC can be very beneficial, giving patients control over their own data and self-sovereign identity. To the extent of our knowledge, there is no literature covering the same concerns. More specifically, the focus is on solutions that aim the realization of holistic BC-based Electronic Health Records (EHR) and Patient Health Records (PHR). EHR and PHR are used to record patient data, such as the doctor's notes upon a visit and radiology images. Hence, they include critical information regarding patient's privacy and identity. Therefore, development of pure decentralized Healthcare Information Systems (HIS) is a great challenge in terms of architectural and technical structure of the systems. Designing robust and reliable EHR and PHR, which represent the foundation of many other healthcare services, relies on carefully finding the balance in a trade-off between many factors, such as level of decentralization, privacy, scalability and data throughput. In this paper, we review the state-of-the-art and provide an analysis on the design trade-offs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations172
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicBlockchain Technology Applications and SecurityFrench-language works237,207