Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35157788›Full record

ArticleClinical and translational science2022

Evaluation of a blockchain-based dynamic consent platform (METORY) in a decentralized and multicenter clinical trial using virtual drugs.

Ki Young Huh, Seol Ju Moon, Sang-Un Jeong, Min-Ji Kim, Wooseok Yang, Myeonggyu Jeong, Min-Gul Kim, SeungHwan Lee

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and translational science, 2022. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Integrating population-based biobanks: Catalyst for advances in precision health.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
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

8 authors.

Ki Young HuhDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Seoul National University College of Medicine and Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
Seol Ju MoonCenter for Clinical Pharmacology and Biomedical Research Institute, Jeonbuk National University Hospital, Jeonju, Korea.
Sang-Un JeongCenter for Clinical Pharmacology and Biomedical Research Institute, Jeonbuk National University Hospital, Jeonju, Korea.
Min-Ji KimCenter for Clinical Pharmacology and Biomedical Research Institute, Jeonbuk National University Hospital, Jeonju, Korea.
Wooseok YangClinical Trial Center, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
Myeonggyu JeongClinical Trial Center, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
Min-Gul KimCenter for Clinical Pharmacology and Biomedical Research Institute, Jeonbuk National University Hospital, Jeonju, Korea.
SeungHwan LeeDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Seoul National University College of Medicine and Hospital, Seoul, Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Blockchain is a novel data architecture characterized by a chronological sequence of blocks in a decentralized manner. We aimed to evaluate the real-world feasibility of a blockchain-based dynamic consent platform (METORY) in a decentralized and multicenter trial. The study consisted of three visits (i.e., screening and 2 follow-up visits) with a 2-week interval. Each subject was required to report the self-measured body temperatures and take a virtual investigational drug by entering the unique drug code on the application. To simulate real-world study settings, two major (i.e., changes in the schedule of body temperature measurement) and three minor protocol amendments (i.e., nonsignificant changes without any changes in the procedures) were set. Overall study completion rates, proportion of consent, and response time to each protocol amendment and adherence were evaluated. A total of 60 subjects (30 in each center) were enrolled in two study centers. All subjects completed the study, and the overall proportion of consent to each protocol amendment was 95.7 ± 13.7% (mean ± SD), with a median response time of 0.2 h. Overall, subjects took 90.8% ± 19.2% of the total drug, whereas compliance with the schedule was 69.1% ± 27.0%. Subjects reported 96.7% ± 4.2% of the total body temperature measurements whereas the adherence to the schedule was 59.0% ± 25.0%, which remarkably decreased after major protocol amendments. In conclusion, we evaluated a blockchain-based dynamic consent platform in real clinical trial settings. The results suggested that major changes should be avoided unless subjects' proper understanding is warranted.

Indexed as

BlockchainCOVID-19HumansInformed ConsentSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID35157788
PMCPMC9099134

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.