Patients’, pharmacists’, and prescribers’ attitude toward using blockchain and machine learning in a proposed ePrescription system: online survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the attitudes of the parties involved in the system toward the new features and measure the potential benefits of introducing the use of blockchain and machine learning (ML) to strengthen the in-place methods for safely prescribing medication. The proposed blockchain will strengthen the security and privacy of the patient's prescription information shared in the network. Once the ePrescription is submitted, it is only available in read-only mode. This will ensure there is no alteration to the ePrescription information after submission. In addition, the blockchain will provide an improved tracking mechanism to ensure the originality of the ePrescription and that a prescriber can only submit an ePrescription with the patient's authorization. Lastly, before submitting an ePrescription, an ML algorithm will be used to detect any anomalies (eg, missing fields, misplaced information, or wrong dosage) in the ePrescription to ensure the safety of the prescribed medication for the patient. METHODS: The survey contains questions about the features introduced in the proposed ePrescription system to evaluate the security, privacy, reliability, and availability of the ePrescription information in the system. The study population is comprised of 284 respondents in the patient group, 39 respondents in the pharmacist group, and 27 respondents in the prescriber group, all of whom met the inclusion criteria. The response rate was 80% (226/284) in the patient group, 87% (34/39) in the pharmacist group, and 96% (26/27) in the prescriber group. KEY FINDINGS: The vast majority of the respondents in all groups had a positive attitude toward the proposed ePrescription system's security and privacy using blockchain technology, with 72% (163/226) in the patient group, 70.5% (24/34) in the pharmacist group, and 73% (19/26) in the prescriber group. Moreover, the majority of the respondents in the pharmacist (70%, 24/34) and prescriber (85%, 22/26) groups had a positive attitude toward using ML algorithms to generate alerts regarding prescribed medication to enhance the safety of medication prescribing and prevent medication errors. CONCLUSION: Our survey showed that a vast majority of respondents in all groups had positive attitudes toward using blockchain and ML algorithms to safely prescribe medications. However, a need for minor improvements regarding the proposed features was identified, and a post-implementation user study is needed to evaluate the proposed ePrescription system in depth.
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 | 0.006 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".