ArticleDigital health
Evaluation of patient perception towards dynamic health data sharing using blockchain based digital consent with the Dovetail digital consent application: A cross sectional exploratory study.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Blockchain-Based Dynamic and Revocable Consent for Secondary Health Data Use: Systematic Review.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Pooled it
- Blockchain for Digital Health Governance: Evidence Gap Map and Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Patient Perceptions of Blockchain-Based Health Information Exchange: User-Centered Design Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Blockchain Applications in Core Healthcare Services: Patient Data, Research, and Institutional Processes.Blockchain in healthcare today · 2025Article
- Blockchain: What is the use case for physicians in 2024? A rapid review of the literature.Future healthcare journal · 2024Review
- Identifying facilitators of and barriers to the adoption of dynamic consent in digital health ecosystems: a scoping review.BMC medical ethics · 2023Article
- Patient Perspectives and Preferences for Consent in the Digital Health Context: State-of-the-art Literature Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Review
- Australian general practitioner perceptions to sharing clinical data for secondary use: a mixed method approach.BMC primary care · 2022Article
- Is blockchain ready for orthopaedics? A systematic review.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2021Review
- Managing medicines in the time of COVID-19: implications for community-dwelling people with dementia.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNew patient-centric integrated care models are enabled by the capability to exchange the patient's data amongst stakeholders, who each specialise in different aspects of the patient's care. This requires a robust, trusted and flexible mechanism for patients to offer consent to share their data. Furthermore, new IT technologies make it easier to give patients more control over their data, including the right to revoke consent. These characteristics challenge the traditional paper-based, single-organisation-led consent process. The Dovetail digital consent application uses a mobile application and blockchain based infrastructure to offer this capability, as part of a pilot allowing patients to have their data shared amongst digital tools, empowering patients to manage their condition within an integrated care setting.
objectiveTo evaluate patient perceptions towards existing consent processes, and the Dovetail blockchain based digital consent application as a means to manage data sharing in the context of diabetes care.
methodPatients with diabetes at a General Practitioner practice were recruited. Data were collected using focus groups and questionnaires. Thematic analysis of the focus group transcripts and descriptive statistics of the questionnaires was performed.
resultsThere was a lack of understanding of existing consent processes in place, and many patients did not have any recollection of having previously given consent. The digital consent application received favourable feedback, with patients recognising the value of the capability offered by the application. Patients overwhelmingly favoured the digital consent application over existing practice.
conclusionsDigital consent was received favourably, with patients recognising that it addresses the main limitations of the current process. Feedback on potential improvements was received. Future work includes confirmation of results in a broader demographic sample and across multiple conditions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.