The DOI matches its Crossref record; 45 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 32 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences—A scoping review
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Blockchain can be described as an immutable ledger, logging data entries in a decentralized manner. This new technology has been suggested to disrupt a wide range of data-driven domains, including the health domain. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to systematically review, assess and synthesize peer-reviewed publications utilizing/proposing to utilize blockchain to improve processes and services in healthcare, health sciences and health education. METHOD: A structured literature search on the topic was conducted in October 2018 relevant bibliographic databases. RESULT: 39 publications fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The result indicates that Electronic Health Records and Personal Health Records are the most targeted areas using blockchain technology. Access control, interoperability, provenance and data integrity are all issues that are meant to be improved by blockchain technology in this field. Ethereum and Hyperledger fabric seem to be the most used platforms/frameworks in this domain. CONCLUSION: This study shows that the endeavors of using blockchain technology in the health domain are increasing exponentially. There are areas within the health domain that potentially could be highly impacted by blockchain technology.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This scoping review systematically assessed 39 peer-reviewed publications on blockchain in healthcare, health sciences, and health education. It found that EHRs and PHRs are the most targeted areas, consortium blockchains and Ethereum/Hyperledger are common, but the field remains early and lacks evidence of real-world effects and regulatory compliance.
Key findings
- Of 39 included publications, 43% targeted electronic health records, 15% personal health records, and 5% clinical trial support systems; 62% addressed some process of sharing health data.
- Blockchain was proposed to improve access control in 35% of publications, interoperability in 27%, data integrity in 28%, and provenance in 12%.
- Consortium blockchain was the preferred type (38%); Ethereum was used in 28%, Hyperledger Fabric in 10%, and Exonum in 4%; 36% developed a new blockchain and 21% did not specify a platform. PoW was the most frequent consensus algorithm (21%), PBFT was 15%, 41% did not state a consensus protocol, and 38% used smart contracts.
- The average citation count was 21 ± 40 (up to March 2019); publications by year were 2016 (n = 4), 2017 (n = 11), and 2018 (n = 23); most studies were associated with Chinese (42%) or USA (20%) research institutes. Quality assessment total mean score was 5.7 ± 1.8, with a range of 1–9.
Methods
- A structured literature search was conducted in October 2018 in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Google Scholar, Compendex, Inspec, ACM, and IEEE, searching for “blockchain” combined with “health” and using backward/forward snowballing.
- Titles, abstracts, and full articles were screened by reviewer 1, with doubtful cases reviewed by three additional reviewers; disagreements were resolved by discussion. Data were extracted into a pre-developed matrix and analyzed in Microsoft Excel.
- Quality assessment used a tool adapted from Hölbl et al.; no papers were excluded in this process. All included papers were categorized as Proof-of-Concept design, and eleven were considered a hybrid between Proof-of-Concept and case-study design.
Limitations
- The paper states that the review does not capture the whole picture, especially promising private-sector developments not covered in the included publications, such as genome management and medical credential systems.
- The paper states that none of the included publications described how their blockchain-based solution complied with GDPR, HIPAA, or other national health data laws and regulations.
- Evident from the text: many included publications failed to define their blockchain type, platform/framework, or consensus protocol, limiting comparability and feasibility assessment; the search was last updated in October 2018, so later work is not included.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
47 Own result · 18 Not checked yet · 10 Own interpretation · 8 No basis given · 4 Own method
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“39 publications fulfilled the inclusion criteria.”
- Also stated in: § 4. Results · plain
“The following section presents a summary of the extracted data from the included papers (n = 39).”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > Abstract
plainn = 39- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § 4. Results · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“More than half of the publications (62 %) addressed some processes of sharing health data.”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 4.1.1. Summary of proposed solutions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The most frequently targeted system was EHR, with 43 % of the publications addressing this topic.”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 4.1.1. Summary of proposed solutions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The result indicates that Electronic Health Records and Personal Health Records are the most targeted areas using blockchain technology.”
- Also stated in: § 4.1.1. Summary of proposed solutions · plain
“The most frequently targeted system was EHR, with 43 % of the publications addressing this topic.Other systems of focus were PHR (15 %) and clinical trial support systems (5 %).”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § 4.1.1. Summary of proposed solutions · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Many of the PHRs were proposed as patient-controlled and not tethered to a particular health institution or system (Table 6).”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 4.1.1. Summary of proposed solutions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Ethereum and Hyperledger fabric seem to be the most used platforms/frameworks in this domain.”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > Abstract
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This study shows that the endeavors of using blockchain technology in the health domain are increasing exponentially.”
- Also stated in: § Quality Assessment Query · plain
“The included papers were published during the following years; 2016 (n = 4), 2017 (n = 11) and 2018 (n = 23).”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > Abstract
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Quality Assessment Query · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although several of the papers failed to define their approach (26 %), private-(10 %) and public blockchains (15 %) appears to be less used in the health domain (Fig. 4).”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 4.2. Technical details of the proposed blockchain concepts 4.2.1. Type of blockchain
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Blockchain solutions for the interoperability challenges were discussed in several papers (27 %) (Table 5).”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > Health Information system
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Eight (21 %) of the included studies failed to specify a platform or framework for their concept (Fig. 4).”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 4.2.2. Blockchain platform/framework
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 25
- It may state two separate claims as one. 17
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The included papers were published during the following years; 2016 (n = 4), 2017 (n = 11) and 2018 (n = 23).”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > Quality Assessment Query
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Most studies were associated with Chinese research institutes or research groups (42 %) followed by institutes and groups in the USA (20 %).”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > Quality Assessment Query
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Access control, interoperability, provenance and data integrity are all issues that are meant to be improved by blockchain technology in this field.”
- Also stated in: § 4.1.2. Challenges which blockchain aims to improve · plain
“As illustraded in Table 5, blockchain was suggested as an improvement to access control in 35 % of the included publications.”
- Also stated in: § Health Information system · plain
“Blockchain solutions for the interoperability challenges were discussed in several papers (27 %) (Table 5).”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § 4.1.2. Challenges which blockchain aims to improve · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The papers had an average citation count of 21 ± 40 (up to March 2019).”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > Quality Assessment Query
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As shown in Table 4, the included publications seem to be evenly distributed between journal publications and conference proceedings.”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 4.1. Bibliographic overview
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A large proportion proposed a structural design (54 %) as main contribution, followed by proposals including new algorithms or protocols (38 %) (Table 4).”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > Quality Assessment Query
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“IEEE Access with five papers and The Journal of Medical Systems with six papers represented the journals with most included publications.”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 4.1. Bibliographic overview
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Other systems of focus were PHR (15 %) and clinical trial support systems (5 %).”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 4.1.1. Summary of proposed solutions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, eleven of the included papers could be considered as a hybrid between a Proof-of-Concept and a Casestudy design.”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > Quality Assessment Query
hedgedn = 11- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, it is also noteworthy that not all concepts that are built using the Ethereum platform or Ethereum protocols used PoW.”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 4.2.3. Consensus algorithm
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Ethereum was utilized in eleven (28 %) of the 39 included publications, Hyperledger Fabric four times (10 %) and Exonum once (4 %) (Fig. 4).”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 4.2.2. Blockchain platform/framework
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The quality of the included publications varies with a standard deviation of 1.8 for the total mean score and a range of 1-9.”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 4.3. Quality assessment
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Ethereum (decentralized platform) (5) and Hyperledger (framework) [9] are so far the most popular, and both allow developers to build new blockchain applications onto existing blockchains and to create new test-nets using their protocols.”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 2.1.3. Existing or new blockchains
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [9]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Data was extracted from the included papers in a pre-development matrix.The data extraction was mainly done by reviewer 1 [AH] and later re-examined by reviewers 2-4 [AF, KK and DG].”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 3.3. Data extraction
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Titles, abstracts and full articles were subsequently screened by reviewer 1 [AH] applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria (Appendix B -Protocol).Publications meeting the inclusive criteria, and those for which the first reviewer was in doubt, were reviewed a second time by three additional reviewers [AF, KK and DG].In cases of disagreement, a discussion between all four reviewers determined”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 3.2. Selection process
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To both maintain the patient's privacy and exchange data with other institutions in the healthcare ecosystem, access control, provenance, data integrity and interoperability are crucial.”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 2.2. The potential of blockchain in the health domain
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The blockchain Ethereum is at this date the largest facilitator of smart contracts on blockchain [5].”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 2. Background
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [5]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Bitcoin, with close to 400 million completed transactions (March 19, 2019) [2], represents a solid use-case that blockchain technology works.”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 1. Introduction and rationale
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [2]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“With some of its key attributes such as decentralization, distribution and data integrity, and without any necessary third party, blockchain technology has many appealing properties that could be utilized to improve and obtain a higher level of interoperability, information sharing, access control, provenance and data integrity among the mentioned stakeholders, thereby moving towards a new”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 2.2. The potential of blockchain in the health domain
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
In the paper
“Although blockchain technology is considered to have potential for real improvement of health information systems [3], the recent hype surrounding this technology similarly entails unrealistic proposals and ideas and current literature provides little overview of applications that have been developed, tested and/or deployed.”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 1. Introduction and rationale
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [3]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this scoping literature review, we have found that the research on the explorative use of blockchain in healthcare is an academic research topic in its infancy but that the number of research groups approaches and proposed solutions currently is growing exponentially.”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 5. Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A smart-contract function, which often has the purpose of reducing third party interaction, has the potential of making health informatic processes more efficient.”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 5. Discussion
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The strength of this publication is its stringent inclusion criteria and the quality assessment approach.”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 5. Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although this study provides a good overview of what has recently been investigated in an academic (peer-reviewed) setting, the review does not capture the whole picture of the development in the area.”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 5. Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: There are promising developments in the private sector in other areas of the health sector that are not covered in the included publications for this review, for example genome management and medical credential systems.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Judged from the number of blockchain-related publications on Google Scholar, the inauguration and growth of blockchain in healthcare as an academic field is in line with those in other academic sectors.”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 5. Discussion
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Since HIS deals with highly sensitive data [18], which usually entails that a limited number of entities should have access, a consortium blockchain may be more appropriate than a public permissionless and private to ensure that data are not accessible by those who have no view rights and also to comply with current health data regulations.”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 5. Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [18]
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“With stronger emphasis on team-based care and continuity of care across institutional borders, and identity management and access control across different health systems, the processes of sharing becomes important [58].”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 5. Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [58] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Since HIS deals with highly sensitive data [18], which usually entails that a limited number of entities should have access, a consortium blockchain may be more appropriate than a public permissionless and private to ensure that data are not accessible by those who have no view rights and also to comply with current health data regulations.”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 5. Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [18]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Research on the use of blockchain in healthcare is now established as an academic field, and the number and quality of publications are increasing rapidly.”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 6. Conclusion
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The evidence collected in this review gives a clear indication that blockchain enhanced solutions for this area of the health system have a promising potential and needs to be explored further.”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 5. Discussion
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: M-health will increase at a rapid pace in the coming years.
In the paper
“This is an alternative take on the use of health information to fix a broken healthcare system and improve the continuity of care [59] which builds on the patient in a more empowered and controlling role.”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 5. Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [59] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This correlates well with the overall popularity of blockchain platforms.”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 5. Discussion
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper relies on this without support.
Current literature provides little overview of applications that have been developed, tested and/or deployed.
“current literature provides little overview of applications that have been developed, tested and/or deployed.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
M-health will increase at a rapid pace in the coming years.
“There is a reasonable assumption that m-health will increase at a rapid pace in the coming years and the need to verify and access m-health generated data by the health systems becomes crucial for the continued development of HIS and to insure that these data-driven systems stay up to date.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Healthcare institutions are in critical demand for new and improved trust-preserving solutions.
“Due to the over-arching importance of maintaining trust while satisfying an ever-increasing demand for exchange of data within the healthcare ecosystem, healthcare institutions are in critical demand for new and improved trust-preserving solutions.”
The paper relies on this without support.
M-health is a rather new field and lacks a common data infrastructure and, to some degree, lacks common regulation around dealing with health data and getting the data accepted by the established health system.
“M-health is a rather new field and lacks a common data infrastructure and, to some degree, lacks common regulation around dealing with health data and getting the data accepted by the established health system.”
The paper relies on this without support.
There are promising developments in the private sector in other areas of the health sector that are not covered in the included publications for this review, for example genome management and medical credential systems.
“There are promising developments in the private sector in other areas of the health sector that are not covered in the included publications for this review; for example, genome management and medical credential systems.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The blockchain technology market in the global healthcare industrial sector is expected to cross $500 million by 2022.
“This trend is also noticeable in the global healthcare industrial sector, where the blockchain technology market is expected to cross $500 million by 2022.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“While these SLRs have contributed to the extant body of knowledge, their focus has primarily been on synthesizing or delineating trends (e.g.Hasselgren et al., 2020) and areas of blockchain application (see Risius & Spohrer, 2017;Hölbl et al. 2018;Agbo et al. 2019;Jaoude & Saade, 2019).”
From Blockchain in healthcare: A systematic literature review, synthesizing framework and future research agenda (2020) · cites this paper as Hasselgren et al., 2020
In the citing paper
“Given the sensitivity of wearable data, next-generation cybersecurity tools, such as blockchain111, should be considered because data breaches are expected as an eventuality rather than a mere possibility and because the data constantly move from one platform to another.”
From Smart wearable devices in cardiovascular care: Where we are and how to move forward (2021) · cites this paper as [111]
In the citing paper
“Up to date, blockchain has proved its success in healthcare and biomedical applications with promising performances in terms of healthcare data security [49], secure data management [50], [51], and transparent medical data storage [52], [53].”
From Blockchain and AI-Based Solutions to Combat Coronavirus (COVID-19)-Like Epidemics: A Survey (2021) · cites this paper as [49]
In the citing paper
“In one study, patients who were willing to share their health data with their physician (72%) but fewer with their health insurer or manufacturing companies (53%).57”
From Unlocking Tomorrow’s Health Care: Expanding the Clinical Scope of Wearables by Applying Artificial Intelligence (2024) · cites this paper as [57]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated major: it would touch a result — a value a result rests on, reported and recomputed p-values on opposite sides of the significance level, two passages that conflict with no sign which is right, or a cited work retracted before this paper was published.
In the paper
“| Grand Total | 39 |”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 6. Conclusion
Reported 39 · recomputed 33
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“Exonum once (4 %)”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 4.2.2. Blockchain platform/framework
Reported 4 · recomputed 2.564103
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > Quality Assessment Query
“Q5 Are the proposed solutions feasible (scalable, economical, implementable)?”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 6. Conclusion
“| Q5 Problem solution fit |”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 6. Conclusion
“| Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance | 6 | 5, 8, 14, 21, 24, 37 |”
§ Blockchain in healthcare and health sciences-A scoping review > 6. Conclusion
“| Not defined | 16 | 1, 7, 8, 11-13, 16, 17, 25-28, |”
Citations
Cites
Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash SystemPreprint
Nakamoto, S. (2019) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3440802 · Cited by 14,677 · cited 6×
“The public blockchain is widely used in cryptocurrencies, and the two largest cryptocurrencies: Bitcoin [1] and Ethereum [5] (the main chain), are categorized as public permissionless chains.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialAn Overview of Blockchain Technology: Architecture, Consensus, and Future Trends
Zheng, Z., Xie, S., Dai, H., Chen, X., & Wang, H. (2017) · 2017 IEEE International Congress on Big Data (BigData Congress) · doi:10.1109/bigdatacongress.2017.85 · Cited by 4,515
MedRec: Using Blockchain for Medical Data Access and Permission Management
Azaria, A., Ekblaw, A., Vieira, T., & Lippman, A. (2016) · 2016 2nd International Conference on Open and Big Data (OBD) · doi:10.1109/obd.2016.11 · Cited by 2,526
Levy, Y. M., & Ellis, T. J. (2006) · Informing Science The International Journal of an Emerging Transdiscipline · doi:10.28945/479 · Cited by 1,724 · cited 2×
“As an important part of the review process a meticulous quality assessment of included publications was conducted [17].”
BackgroundMethodMeDShare: Trust-Less Medical Data Sharing Among Cloud Service Providers via Blockchain
Xia, Q., Sifah, E. B., Asamoah, K. O., Gao, J., Du, X., & Guizani, M. (2017) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2017.2730843 · Cited by 1,148 · cited 1×
“…control, data integrity, interoperability 12 [30] Electronic health records Sharing healthcare data between health institutions Data integrity 13 [31] Electronic health records Sharing healthcare data between health institutions Data integrity, access control 14 [32] Administrative systems…”
BackgroundPPCoin: Peer-to-Peer Crypto-Currency with Proof-of-Stake
King, S., & Nadal, S. (2012) · Cited by 984
Healthcare blockchain system using smart contracts for secure automated remote patient monitoring
Griggs, K. N., Ossipova, O., Kohlios, C. P., Baccarini, A. N., Howson, E. A., & Hayajneh, T. (2018) · Journal of Medical Systems · doi:10.1007/s10916-018-0982-x · Cited by 926 · cited 2×
“…20 [38] Electronic health records Patient data management and storage in a cloud environment Access control, data integrity, data provenance 21 [39] Population health management system Collection and storage of sensor data for remote patient monitoring purposes Data integrity, data provenance…”
BackgroundDagher, G. G., Mohler, J., Milojkovic, M., & Marella, P. B. (2018) · Sustainable Cities and Society · doi:10.1016/j.scs.2018.02.014 · Cited by 854 · cited 2×
“…health data/Electronic health records Managing access to personal health data and electronic health records Access control, data integrity 23 [41] Electronic health records Patients’ collection, archiving and sharing of healthcare data for clinical purposes Access control, data integrity,…”
BackgroundMethodFhirchain: applying blockchain to securely and scalably share clinical data
Zhang, P., White, J., Schmidt, D. C., Lenz, G., & Rosenbloom, S. T. (2018) · Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal · doi:10.1016/j.csbj.2018.07.004 · Cited by 796 · cited 3×
“1 [19] Electronic health records Shared decision making Interoperability, access control, data integrity 2 [20] Electronic health records Health data recording, storing and sharing Access control, interoperability 3 [21] Knowledge infrastructures Aid decision-making by presenting knowledge Data integrity, repudiation…”
BackgroundA Systematic Review of the Use of Blockchain in Healthcare
Hölbl, M., Kompara, M., Kamišalić, A., & Nemec Zlatolas, L. (2018) · Symmetry · doi:10.3390/sym10100470 · Cited by 780 · cited 3×
“To this end, parts of the method presented by Hölbl et al. were used and modified as appropriate [18].”
BackgroundMethodInfluential
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- blockchain.com [cited 2019 09.03]. Available from: https://www.blockchain.com/charts/n-transactions-total.
- Courtney, 1989, Some informal comments about integrity and the integrity workshop
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 601–674 of 674
(2022) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-3-437-21884-2.00033-7
Ziemssen, T., & Voigt, I. (2022) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-3-437-21884-2.00031-3
Louja, A., Zaiouane, Y., Benchrif, M., Azizi, N., Jamali, A., & Naja, N. (2026) · Multimedia Systems · doi:10.1007/s00530-026-02317-7
A Blockchain-based Platform to Provide Security and Transparency in Organ Donation in KSA
Basahel, A. M., Sen, A. A. A., Bahbouh, N. M., Yamin, M., Basahel, A. A., & Nooh, O. (2025) · International Conference on Computing for Sustainable Global Development · doi:10.23919/indiacom66777.2025.11115507
“Hasselgren et al. [26] summarized researches that has used blockchain technology to improve healthcare operations and services.”
Liu, R., Xiong, Y., Zhang, H., Shi, F., & Mu, J. (2025) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-981-95-1337-6_6
Duarte, R. J. D. S., Cunha, J., Lopes, J., Hak, F., Guimarães, T. A. S., & Santos, M. F. (2025) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-94950-0_16
A Blockchain-Based Framework for Secure Data Sharing in Healthcare
Bhimavarapu, U. (2025) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-1225-5.ch005
Revolutionizing Healthcare: AI-driven Innovations in Drug Development and Personalized Medicine
Jaitawat, D. P. S., Chauhan, S. B., Jain, C., & Singh, I. (2025) · Current pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine (Online)/Current pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine · doi:10.2174/0118756921395626250905121219 · Cited by 1
Sharma, P., Kumar, T., & Tyagi, S. S. (2025) · Lecture notes in networks and systems · doi:10.1007/978-981-96-6046-9_30
Blockchain Technology in Addressing Healthcare Issues: Opportunities and Challenges
Uttreshwar, G. P., Akram, H. B., & Chikurdekar, S. V. (2025) · International Journal of Latest Technology in Engineering Management & Applied Science · doi:10.51583/ijltemas.2025.1413sp009
Secure Sharing of Medical Imaging Through Blockchain
Jain, P. A. (2025) · Scientific Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Blockchain Technologies · doi:10.63345/sjaibt.v2.i2.203
Dulloo, R., & Shah, M. K. (2025) · International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Emerging Technologies (ICAIET) · doi:10.1109/icaiet65052.2025.11211085
“Several researchers have pointed to the prospects in which blockchain can be used to implement the electronic health records system, a pharmaceutical supply chain management system, clinical trials, or an insurance claims application in healthcare [3].”
InfluentialThe Role of Blockchain in Genomics Sciences
Gautam, S. K., Menon, M., & Rana, R. (2025) · doi:10.1002/9781394336043.ch20
Assurance Saving Blockchain Structure for Medical the Executives with Respect to the Board
S, H. S., & Ebenezer, A. S. (2025) · Lecture notes in networks and systems · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-06694-7_5
Retracted: Blockchain-Based Medical Supply Chain with Smart Contract Enforcement
Kumaraswamy., S., Karande, M. A. M., Balasubramani, R., Soni, U., Sapatnekar, A., & Maranan, R. (2025) · International Conference on Intelligent Algorithms for Computational Intelligence Systems (IACIS) · doi:10.1109/iacis65746.2025.11211487
“In developing countries, where infrastructure is often lacking, a decentralized blockchain network can empower smaller players by eliminating the need for expensive central authorities or intermediaries [9].”
RetractedBlockchain-powered healthcare system – a systematic literature review
Rexy, F. M., & Govindaraj, P. (2025) · Engineering Research Express · doi:10.1088/2631-8695/ae1d1b
Blockchains: An overview of the technology, circuit primitives, and future opportunities
Suresh, V. B., & Mathew, S. K. (2025) · IEEE Solid-State Circuits Magazine · doi:10.1109/mssc.2025.3595831
“3) Health care : Another important area of blockchain application is health care [18], [19], [20], [21].”
Decentralized Blockchain Framework for Drug Tracing in Medical Supply Chains
Margret, M. K., Vijayaprabha, G., Swetha, N., & Nithya Lakshmi, M. (2025) · International Conference on New Frontiers in Communication, Automation, Management and Security (ICCAMS) · doi:10.1109/iccams65118.2025.11233869
“[2] Smart contracts further streamline and enforce the allocation process by removing the need for intermediaries, thus reducing potential errors and inefficiencies in the system.”
Blockchain-enabled quality by design system for clinical trials
Barenji, R. V., & Hariry, R. E. (2025) · Frontiers in Medicine · doi:10.3389/fmed.2025.1546897 · Cited by 2
Os efeitos benéficos proporcionados pela tecnologia blockchain na gestão de enfermagem
da Cunha, A. A. P., & Sanches, L. M. P. (2025) · RCMOS - Revista Científica Multidisciplinar O Saber · doi:10.51473/rcmos.v1i2.2025.1824
PPoS-EHR: Attribute-based Access to Encrypted Health Records via Blockchain
Leela, V., Kanishka, K., Kaviyasri, S., Guru Dharshan, K., Harnish, R., & Murugalakshmi, V. (2025) · International Conference on Innovative Data Communication Technologies and Application (ICIDCA) · doi:10.1109/icidca66325.2025.11280586
“Conventional EHR solutions attempt at being compliant by centralizing data, encrypting data in transit and at rest, yet they lag behind in being scalable, being interoperable, granting real time access and in terms of the potential for resilience in today's cybersecurity landscape [8].”
Ramya, K. M., Harshini, G., Ganeshkumar, C., Elangumaran, G. V., & Dhayananth, L. K. (2025) · International Conference on Sustainable Communication Networks and Application (ICSCNA) · doi:10.1109/icscn67106.2025.11308616
“Social media further enhance the speed and scope of misinformation, with contagious content frequently being unsupported scientifically [7, 8].”
Effective of Blockchain Technology and Application in the Healthcare Field
Fawareh, H. J., & Alkhmali, A. (2026) · Studies in systems, decision and control · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-95310-1_156
Harnessing Blockchain Technology to Improve Healthcare Systems and Data Integrity
Fawareh, H. J., & Damra, A. S. (2026) · Studies in systems, decision and control · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-95310-1_165
Medical data security and integrity using blockchain
Thaseen, I. S., Chouwdhury, P., Banu, J. S., Arulkumar, V., Nithya, T. M., & Raj, I. I. (2026) · AIP conference proceedings · doi:10.1063/5.0298210
Makinde, O. F., Duruemeruo, U. C., Eziokwu, U. J., Olasehan, O. A., Ani, S. F., & Adebayo, A. (2021) · International Journal of Scientific Research in Science Engineering and Technology · doi:10.32628/ijsrset214419
Smart UDI for Medical Devices: Global Harmonization, Cybersecurity, and Digital Convergence
Kumbhar, S., & Tamboli, A. (2026) · Biomedical Materials & Devices · doi:10.1007/s44174-025-00627-4
Z -Herb: A Website for Home-Made Herbal Remedy
Jaspin, K., Emmima Elizabeth, E., & Gunachitra, B. (2025) · International Conference on Applied Artificial Intelligence and Computing (ICAAIC) · doi:10.1109/icaaic64647.2025.11330607
The Development of Blockchain Platform for Maritime Supply Chain
Lin, C.-T., Chen, T., & Lu, H. H.-S. (2026) · Springer handbooks of computational statistics · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-95418-4_17
Wang, X., Lin, R., Tang, J., Huang, R., Chen, H., Liang, L., & Huang, B. (2025) · IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedicine (BIBM) · doi:10.1109/bibm66473.2025.11357073
Impact of Blockchain Technology on Nursing Documentation and Patient Privacy
Alshammari, A. H. A., Alhazmi, M. Q., Alanazi, B. S. M., Alanazi, A. K. A., Alanazi, K. F. N., Alanazi, A. R. S., Alenezi, H. K. H., Naqzi, M. M. A., Alhazmi, M. S. M., & Alhamad, M. M. M. (2024) · International Journal of Computational and Experimental Science and Engineering · doi:10.22399/ijcesen.4794
“This demonstrates the practical application of self-sovereign identity and granular consent for data sharing, a model that could eventually feed relevant, patient-shared data back into the clinical record used by nurses [35].”
Governance and Reform in the Healthcare System: Key Challenges and Perspectives
Сергіївна, В. Н., Lavrentii, D., Monastyrskyi, G., Demchyshyn, Y., & Levytska, Y. (2026) · Premier journal of science. · doi:10.70389/pjs.100231
Sheikh, Z., Samarth, G., & Jaffer, U. (2026) · JMIR Medical Informatics · doi:10.2196/76980
“Once data are entered into the blockchain, it becomes immutable, ensuring the authenticity of records such as trial protocols, consent logs, and clinical outcomes [5].”
InfluentialEnhancing Healthcare Supply Chain Security Through Blockchain and Intelligent Firewall Integration
Senthilkumar, P., & Asha, V. (2026) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-3191-1.ch008
Review on Blockchain-Based Data Authentication for Secured Healthcare System
Chandra, R., & Das, B. (2026) · Lecture notes in networks and systems · doi:10.1007/978-981-96-9494-5_37
Uppal, A., Kakkar, B., Kaul, M., Johri, P., & Srivastava, A. (2025) · International Conference on System Modeling & Advancement in Research Trends (SMART) · doi:10.1109/smart66937.2025.11389683
Park, J.-H., & Kim, S. (2026) · medRxiv · doi:10.64898/2026.02.24.26347051
Blockchain frontiers in Statistics
Rambharat, B. R., & Gel, Y. R. (2026) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A (Statistics in Society) · doi:10.1093/jrsssa/qnag035
Haryadi, G. A., Allwinnaldo, Ansori, M. R. R., Lee, J.-M., & Kim, D. (2026) · IEEE Transactions on Big Data · doi:10.1109/tbdata.2026.3679606
“Patients can control permissions, track usage, and ensure authenticity, aligning with the growing emphasis on autonomy in healthcare [32], [33].”
Blockchain-Enabled Healthcare Management System Using Role-Based Access Control Smart Contract
Anand, K., & Tamilarasi, R. (2026) · IEEE International Conference on Interdisciplinary Approaches in Technology and Management for Social Innovation (IATMSI) · doi:10.1109/iatmsi68868.2026.11465899
“In [9], blockchain performance evaluation was provided in a distributed environment; in a fog and edge computing context, throughput and latency performance metrics were evaluated, showing adaptability but pointing out resource constraints on the edge devices.”
Blockchain for Healthcare Data Security
Kolli, Y. K., Kushala, K., Induru, V., Radhakrishnan, P., Ramar, V. A., & Premalatha, R. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-2600-0981-9.ch010
McPherson, C., Davis, R., Battu, M., & Lazar, B. (2026) · Healthcare · doi:10.3390/healthcare14101285
“A scoping review [20] The state of research, as this paper illustrates, indicates that a few EHR, PHR, and clinical trial system use cases are now investigating blockchain-based solutions.”
A Systematic Review On Current Condition in Medical Healthcare Using Blockchain Technology
Srivastava, V., Patil, H., & Kumar, L. (2025) · IEEE International Conference on Recent Trends in Computing and Smart Mobility (RCSM) · doi:10.1109/rcsm67767.2025.11507200
“In short, a systematic review collects all existing research work in a balanced manner, ensuring the objectivity and credibility of work [5] [9].”
Hybrid Blockchain and Edge AI Framework for Data Integrity in IoT-Based Healthcare Systems
Azbeg, A., Azbeg, K., Ouchetto, O., & Andaloussi, S. J. (2026) · Lecture notes on data engineering and communications technologies · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-23035-5_13
Senarathna, J. I. (2026) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-9731396/v1
The Regulatory Challenges From the Intersection of AI and Blockchain Technology in Healthcare
Panagiotopoulou, E., & Mishra, M. P. M. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-2600-2238-2.ch010
Iglesias, V. S., Modi, N. J., Purackal, R. S., Shoukat, K., Koyun, A., Nangolo, M. N., & Park, K. (2026) · Westcliff International Journal of Applied Research · doi:10.47670/wuwijar20262vnrkamk
Patient Data Security Using Blockchain
Gaikwad, S., & Hembade, S. V. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-7426-0.ch002
Transforming healthcare: A bibliometric review of global blockchain integration and future trends
Zhang, B., Xu, J., Yang, K., Yu, L., Zheng, Q., Qin, Y., Xie, Y., & 孙菊玲 (2026) · Medicine · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000049199
Gomes, N. B. P., Salvador, L. N., & da Silva, P. C. (2026) · doi:10.5753/sbcas.2026.20358
“In the healthcare context, this type of ledger provides verifiable and immutable provenance for metadata, being particularly relevant for meeting LGPD 4 requirements regarding the traceability of sensitive personal data processing (Androulaki et al. 2018; Hasselgren et al. 2020).”
Ethereum Blockchain Security, Performance, Markets, and Applications: Scoping Review with ☸SAIMSARA
SAIMSARA (2026) · SAIMSARA Journal · doi:10.62487/saimsarad7a61035
Enhancing Digital Healthcare in India
Paul, P., Bommali, T., Chakraborty, S., Kayyali, M., Moumtzoglou, A. S., Pradhan, U., & Sharma, S. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-2600-2691-5.ch004
Blockchain Enabled EHR Sharing with Zero-Trust Access Controls and Differential Privacy Protection
Venkatesan, C., Ananth, J. P., Sharavana, K., Vijayan, V. B., Kumarganesh, S., & Nithya, C. (2026) · International Conference on Innovations in Emerging Technologies for Sustainable Development (ICIETSD) · doi:10.1109/icietsd68684.2026.11584847
Bharali, B., Chetry, C., & Sharma, R. K. (2026) · Procedia Computer Science · doi:10.1016/j.procs.2026.06.585
Enhancing Healthcare Data Protection with Blockchain Technology
Gond, S., Shubhrant, & Kumar, J. S. (2026) · Procedia Computer Science · doi:10.1016/j.procs.2026.06.232
Quantum AI for Epidemiological Intelligence and Therapeutic Supply Chains
Sarwar, G., Rahman, M. H., & Haider, M. R. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-19536-4_10
Blockchain and Digital Healthcare: Promised Innovation or an Unfinished Revolution?
Natoli, V., Tammacco, A., Mileti, F., & Natoli, V. (2026) · Al-Rafidain Journal of Medical Sciences · doi:10.54133/ajms.v11i1.3147
“[1].”
Sharma, A., Khan, S., Dengre, S., Bansal, S., Wang, H.-C., Sharma, V. K., & Kanellopoulos, D. N. (2026) · Discover Internet of Things · doi:10.1007/s43926-026-00424-5
“Potential of block-chain technology for healthcare and issues related to security, data sharing, and interoperability are focused in [22].”
Security threat modelling for IoT-enabled smart healthcare
Husić, J. B., & Baraković, S. (2026) · Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Smart Environments · doi:10.1177/18761364261474040
“…as energy consumption of ML (Kareem and Quazi, 2024), vulnerabilities within ML systems (Mozaffari-Kermani et al., 2015), optimizing performance metrics (Sanka et al., 2021), developing consensus algorithms (Hasselgren et al., 2020) and dealing with post-quantum technologies (Sanka et al., 2021).”
Toward Patient‐Centric Healthcare Systems: A Systematic Review of Blockchain‐Based Solutions
Roy, S., & Kumar, J. S. (2026) · Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery · doi:10.1002/widm.70124
“As with all advancements in technology, there exist new challenges regarding the use of digitalization of medical data, such as privacy, security, interoperability and control over patient data (Zhang et al. 2021; Hasselgren et al. 2020; Singh et al. 2022).”
Chapala, S., Munnur, R., Gibson, J. G., Iyengar, K. P., Mehta, J. S., & Botchu, R. (2026) · Postgraduate Medical Journal · doi:10.1093/postmj/qgag108
Mittal, A., Jha, R., Sharma, J., & Mehra, P. S. (2026) · Computers & Electrical Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.compeleceng.2026.111432
Kilitci, A., & Calayır, A. K. (2026) · Healthcare · doi:10.3390/healthcare14182892
“A pathology report and WSI file are generated (Step 2), and the clinical content is stored in a secure off-chain environment (Step 3) [26,41].”
InfluentialA review on blockchain-driven e-healthcare service user empowerment
Shishodia, A., Sharma, R., Gunasekaran, A., & Verma, P. (2026) · Technovation · doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2026.103692
Mansour, A., & Saeed, O. (2022) · Journal of Health Informatics and Digital Systems · doi:10.68159/u109668323
Blockchain for healthcare to secure patient data and enabling trusted artificial “intelligence”
Verma, S., Chand, S., & Mishra, P. (2026) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-443-27761-0.00002-0
Hajian, A., & Prybutok, V. R. (2026) · Electronic Markets · doi:10.1007/s12525-026-00935-7
“Hasselgren et al. (2020) conducted a review of blockchain in healthcare systems and found the primary application of blockchain is healthcare records systems.”
Ethakota, V. V. S. S., & Deepthi, K. K. C. (2026) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2026.3734094
Asmar, M., & Tanbour, Q. I. (2026) · Studies in systems, decision and control · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-27683-4_9
Transforming Clinical Data Security and Management through Blockchain
Merit, K. (2026) · Journal of Elecetrical Engineering and Renewable Energies Development · doi:10.66950/rp6wk212
“…was appraised with an eight-item checklist adapted from the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) [33] and the SANRA scale for narrative reviews [7]: (1) explicit research objective; (2) transparent description of method; (3) peer-reviewed venue or authoritative source; (4) empirical component…”
Sadawi, A. A., Ndiaye, M., Khaffaf, I. A., & Abdulkarim, O. (2026) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s26206524
Singh, S., & Firmin, S. (2026) · Computers · doi:10.3390/computers15100729
Metadata
- Authors
- Hasselgren, A., Kralevska, K., Gligoroski, D., Pedersen, S. A., & Faxvaag, A.
- Affiliations
- Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NO)
- Corresponding author
- Hasselgren, Anton
- Venue
- International Journal of Medical Informatics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-02
- Volume
- 134
- Pages
- 104040
- ISSN
- 1386-5056 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2996452324
- Semantic Scholar
- e21700b05fc480d4f2c18462dbeaaf90dadb378d
- Cited by
- 676
- References
- 46
- Citations by year
- 2026: 58 · 2025: 98 · 2024: 123 · 2023: 135 · 2022: 127 · 2021: 109 · 2020: 26
- FWCI
- 11.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- International Journal of Medical Informatics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Blockchain Technology Applications and Security
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Blockchain Technology in Education and Learning
- Keywords
- blockchain, health care, electronic health records, personal health records, interoperability, data integrity, access control, provenance, Ethereum, Hyperledger Fabric, health education
- MeSH terms
- Blockchain, Delivery of Health Care, Humans, Health Records, Personal, Electronic Health Records, Quality Improvement, Health Information Exchange
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-09, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-09 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
