ArticleInnovations in pharmacy2018
If You Build it Will They Come? Patients, Providers and Blockchains in Health Technology Assessment.
Article in Innovations in pharmacy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It is an open question as to whether blockchains can become an integral part of health care management in the US. On the one hand, there are the advocates of blockchains who see them as empowering patients to capture property rights to their medical records in a secure, encrypted, and portable form. On the other hand, there are blockchain critics that see the opportunities offered in health care as little different from those offered in other industries, viewing a blockchain structure as one that may reduce administrative and transaction costs, with little thought given to the potential of blockchain platforms to support a range of health technology assessment activities. While previous commentaries have pointed to this potential, the obstacles offered by the absence of clearly defined property rights and the absence of a market for DNA profiles have not been explored. The case put forward here is that any expectation that a blockchain as a 'one-stop-shop' for the interrogation of personal health records alone is unlikely to succeed. Apart from property rights effectively blocking this business model the blockchain vendor should consider targeted value added activities. At best, only a subset of records has the possibility of being transferred, with ongoing concerns regarding their quality and scope. This does not mean that the blockchain software model should be rejected. Far from it. The blockchain as a health technology assessment platform has the potential to support added value activities which not only improve the process of care and reduce costs and improve efficiencies, but also provide an ideal framework for property rights assignment. This opens the door to incentives and the monetization of value added health data by patients and providers, capturing rents that are at the moment expropriated by third parties. Critical issues are not only property rights and creation of a market place, but the ability to link and incentivize patients and their providers to support active blockchains to generate value added.
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.