ArticleFrontiers in digital health2023
Biometric linkage of longitudinally collected electronic case report forms and confirmation of subject identity: an open framework for ODK and related tools.
Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhancing Patient Identification Accuracy in Shared Child Health Records: a Hybrid Approach for the Lao Language Context.Journal of medical systems · 2025Article
- Long-Term Experiences of Health Care Providers Using Iris Scanning as an Identification Tool in a Vaccine Trial in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: Qualitative Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Using an analogue-digital hybrid clinical data management platform during a two-dose preventive Ebola virus vaccine trial in Goma, the Democratic Republic of the Congo.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The availability of low-cost biometric hardware sensors and software makes it possible to rapidly, affordably and securely sample and store a unique and invariant biological signature (or biometric "template") for the purposes of identification. This has applications in research and trials, particularly for purposes of consent, linkage of case reporting forms collected at different times, and in the confirmation of participant identity for purposes of safety monitoring and adherence to international data laws. More broadly, these methods are applicable to the needs of the billion people who live in resource-restricted settings without identification credentials. The use of mobile electronic data collection software has recently become commonplace in clinical trials, research and actions for public good. A raft of tools based on the open-source ODK project now provide diverse options for data management that work consistently in resource-restricted settings, but none have built-in functionality for capturing biometric templates. In this study, we report the development and validation of a novel open-source app and associated method for capturing and matching biometric fingerprint templates during data collection with the popular data platforms ODK, KoBoToolbox, SurveyCTO, Ona and CommCare. Using data from more than 1,000 fingers, we show that fingerprint templates can be used to link data records with high accuracy. The accuracy of this process increases through the linkage of multiple fingerprints to each data record. By focussing on publishing open-source code and documentation, and by using an affordable (<£50) and mass-produced model of fingerprint sensor, we are able to make this platform freely available to the large global user community that utilises ODK and related data collection systems.
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.