Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36501799›Full record

ReviewSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2022

A Survey of Authentication in Internet of Things-Enabled Healthcare Systems.

Mudassar Ali Khan, Ikram Ud Din, Tha'er Majali, Byung-Seo Kim

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

4 authors.

Mudassar Ali KhanDepartment of Information Technology, The University of Haripur, Haripur 22620, Pakistan.ORCID 0000-0003-1615-4605
Ikram Ud DinDepartment of Information Technology, The University of Haripur, Haripur 22620, Pakistan.ORCID 0000-0001-8896-547X
Tha'er MajaliDepartment of Management Information Systems, Applied Science Private University, Shafa Badran, Amman 11937, Jordan.ORCID 0000-0001-6295-4457
Byung-Seo KimDepartment of Software and Communications Engineering, Hongik University, Sejong 30016, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-9824-1950

Funding

National Research Foundation BK21 FOUR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Internet of medical things (IoMT) provides an ecosystem in which to connect humans, devices, sensors, and systems and improve healthcare services through modern technologies. The IoMT has been around for quite some time, and many architectures/systems have been proposed to exploit its true potential. Healthcare through the Internet of things (IoT) is envisioned to be efficient, accessible, and secure in all possible ways. Even though the personalized health service through IoT is not limited to time or location, many associated challenges have emerged at an exponential pace. With the rapid shift toward IoT-enabled healthcare systems, there is an extensive need to examine possible threats and propose countermeasures. Authentication is one of the key processes in a system's security, where an individual, device, or another system is validated for its identity. This survey explores authentication techniques proposed for IoT-enabled healthcare systems. The exploration of the literature is categorized with respect to the technology deployment region, as in cloud, fog, and edge. A taxonomy of attacks, comprehensive analysis, and comparison of existing authentication techniques opens up possible future directions and paves the road ahead.

Indexed as

EcosystemInternet of ThingsDelivery of Health CareHumansInternetTechnologyauthenticationhealthcareInternet of thingsIoMTsecurityvulnerability

Identifiers

PMID36501799
PMCPMC9738756

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.