Analysis of integration of IoMT with blockchain: issues, challenges and solutions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The incorporation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) into the fields of Neurosurgery and Neurology has transformed the landscape of the healthcare industry. The present study describes seven dimensions of AI that have transformed the way of providing care, diagnosing, and treating patients. It has exhibited unparalleled accuracy in analyzing complex medical imaging data and expediting precise diagnoses of neurological conditions. It has also enabled personalized treatment plans by harnessing patient-specific data and genetic information, promising more effective therapies. For instance, AI-powered surgical robots have brought precision and remote capabilities to neurosurgical procedures, reducing human error. In AI, machine learning models predict disease progression, optimizing resource allocation and patient care, whereas wearable devices with AI provide continuous neurological monitoring, and enable early intervention for chronic conditions. It has also accelerated drug discovery by analyzing vast datasets, potentially leading to breakthrough therapies. Chatbots and virtual assistants powered by AI, enhance patient engagement and adherence to treatment plans. It holds promise in further personalization of care, augmented decision-making, earlier intervention, and the development of groundbreaking treatments. The present study mainly focuses on the incorporation of blockchain technology and provides a reasonable understanding of the associated issues and challenges along with its solutions. It will allow AI and healthcare professionals to advance the field and contribute towards the improvement of an individual's well-being when facing neurological challenges.
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 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".