MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4306377302 · doi:10.3390/electronics11203311

GDPR Compliant Data Storage and Sharing in Smart Healthcare System: A Blockchain-Based Solution

2022· article· en· W4306377302 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Pinky Bai, Sushil Kumar, Kirshna Kumar, Omprakash Kaiwartya, Mufti Mahmud, Jaime Lloret

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTrent UniversityJawaharlal Nehru University
KeywordsBlockchainPersonally identifiable informationGeneral Data Protection RegulationComputer securityComputer scienceData sharingPermissionEuropean unionInternet privacyInformation sharingInformation privacySmart contractData Protection Act 1998Information sensitivityHealth careBusinessWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Smart healthcare systems provide user-centric medical services to patients based on collected information of patients inducing personal health information (PHI) and personal identifiable information (PII). The information (PII and PHI) flows into the smart healthcare system with or without any regulation and patient concern with the help of new information and communication technologies (ICT). The use of ICT comes with the security and privacy issues of collected PII and PHI data. The Europe Union has published the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) to regulate the flow of personal information. Towards this end, this paper proposes a blockchain-based data storage and sharing framework for a smart healthcare system that complies with the “Privacy by Design” rule of the GDPR. The personal information collected from patients is stored on off-chain storage (IPFS), and other information is stored on the blockchain ledger, which is visible to all participants. The smart contracts are designed to share the PII data with another participant based on prior permission of the data owner. The proposed framework also includes the deletion of PII and PHI in the system as per the “Right to be Forgotten” GDPR rule. Security and privacy analyses are performed for the framework to demonstrate the security and privacy of data while sharing and at rest. The comparative performance analysis demonstrates the benefit of the proposed GDPR-compliant data storage and sharing framework using blockchain. It is evident from the reported results that the proposed framework outperforms the state-of-the-art techniques in terms of performance metrics in a smart healthcare system.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations19
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronicsSame topicBlockchain Technology Applications and SecurityFrench-language works237,207