Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34941549›Full record

ReviewJMIR medical informatics2021

Artificial Intelligence-Based Framework for Analyzing Health Care Staff Security Practice: Mapping Review and Simulation Study.

Prosper Kandabongee Yeng, Livinus Obiora Nweke, Bian Yang, Muhammad Ali Fauzi, Einar Arthur Snekkenes

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JMIR medical informatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Prosper Kandabongee YengDepartment of Information Security and Communication Technology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Gjovik, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2553-5936
Livinus Obiora NwekeDepartment of Information Security and Communication Technology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Gjovik, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4888-6851
Bian YangDepartment of Information Security and Communication Technology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Gjovik, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6189-1976
Muhammad Ali FauziDepartment of Information Security and Communication Technology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Gjovik, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9696-2807
Einar Arthur SnekkenesDepartment of Information Security and Communication Technology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Gjovik, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2277-6964

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBlocklisting malicious activities in health care is challenging in relation to access control in health care security practices due to the fear of preventing legitimate access for therapeutic reasons. Inadvertent prevention of legitimate access can contravene the availability trait of the confidentiality, integrity, and availability triad, and may result in worsening health conditions, leading to serious consequences, including deaths. Therefore, health care staff are often provided with a wide range of access such as a "breaking-the-glass" or "self-authorization" mechanism for emergency access. However, this broad access can undermine the confidentiality and integrity of sensitive health care data because breaking-the-glass can lead to vast unauthorized access, which could be problematic when determining illegitimate access in security practices.

objectiveA review was performed to pinpoint appropriate artificial intelligence (AI) methods and data sources that can be used for effective modeling and analysis of health care staff security practices. Based on knowledge obtained from the review, a framework was developed and implemented with simulated data to provide a comprehensive approach toward effective modeling and analyzing security practices of health care staff in real access logs.

methodsThe flow of our approach was a mapping review to provide AI methods, data sources and their attributes, along with other categories as input for framework development. To assess implementation of the framework, electronic health record (EHR) log data were simulated and analyzed, and the performance of various approaches in the framework was compared.

resultsAmong the total 130 articles initially identified, 18 met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. A thorough assessment and analysis of the included articles revealed that K-nearest neighbor, Bayesian network, and decision tree (C4.5) algorithms were predominantly applied to EHR and network logs with varying input features of health care staff security practices. Based on the review results, a framework was developed and implemented with simulated logs. The decision tree obtained the best precision of 0.655, whereas the best recall was achieved by the support vector machine (SVM) algorithm at 0.977. However, the best F1-score was obtained by random forest at 0.775. In brief, three classifiers (random forest, decision tree, and SVM) in the two-class approach achieved the best precision of 0.998.

conclusionsThe security practices of health care staff can be effectively analyzed using a two-class approach to detect malicious and nonmalicious security practices. Based on our comparative study, the algorithms that can effectively be used in related studies include random forest, decision tree, and SVM. Deviations of security practices from required health care staff's security behavior in the big data context can be analyzed with real access logs to define appropriate incentives for improving conscious care security practice.

Indexed as

analysisartificial intelligenceframeworkhealth caremachine learningmodelingsecuritysecurity practice

Identifiers

PMID34941549
PMCPMC8734935

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.