On Deploying Blockchain Technologies in Supply Chain Strategies and the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Literature Review and Research Outlook
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The emergence of a new pandemic, known as COVID-19, has touched various sections of the supply chain (SC). Since then, numerous studies have been conducted on the issue, but the need for a holistic review study that highlights the gaps and limits of previous research, as well as opportunities and agendas for future studies, is palpable. Through a systematic literature review on blockchain technology (BCT) deployment in supply-chain management (SCM) concerning the COVID-19 pandemic, this research seeks to add to the content of previous studies and to enlighten the path for future studies. Relevant papers were found using a variety of resources (Scopus, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and ProQuest). Seventy-two articles were systematically selected, considering the PRISMA procedure, and were thoroughly analyzed based on BCT, methodologies, industrial sectors, geographical, and sustainability context. According to our findings, there is a significant lack of empirical and quantitative methodologies in the literature. The majority of studies did not take specific industries into account. Furthermore, the articles focusing on the sustainability context are few, particularly regarding social and environmental issues. In addition, most of the reviewed papers did not consider the geographical context. The results indicate that the deployment of BCT in several sectors is not uniform, and this utilization is reliant on their services during the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, the concentration of research on the impacts of the BCT on SCM differs according to the conditions of various countries in terms of the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. The findings also show that there is a direct relationship between the deployment of BCT and sustainability factors, such as economic and waste issues, under the circumstances surrounding COVID-19. Finally, this study offers research opportunities and agendas to help academics and other stakeholders to gain a better knowledge of the present literature, recognize aspects that necessitate more exploration, and drive prospective studies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.023 | 0.022 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".