Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38919876›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in digital health2024

Non-fungible tokens (NFTs) in healthcare: a thematic analysis and research agenda.

Khulekani Sibanda, Patrick Ndayizigamiye, Hossana Twinomurinzi

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in digital health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. 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

3 authors.

Khulekani SibandaDepartment of Applied Information Systems, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Patrick NdayizigamiyeCentre for Applied Data Science, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Hossana TwinomurinziCentre for Applied Data Science, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: In the big data era, where corporations commodify health data, non-fungible tokens (NFTs) present a transformative avenue for patient empowerment and control. NFTs are unique digital assets on the blockchain, representing ownership of digital objects, including health data. By minting their data as NFTs, patients can track access, monetize its use, and build secure, private health information systems. However, research on NFTs in healthcare is in its infancy, warranting a comprehensive review. Methods: This study conducted a systematic literature review and thematic analysis of NFTs in healthcare to identify use cases, design models, and key challenges. Five multidisciplinary research databases (Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, IEEE Explore, Elsevier Science Direct) were searched. The approach involved four stages: paper collection, inclusion/exclusion criteria application, screening, full-text reading, and quality assessment. A classification and coding framework was employed. Thematic analysis followed six steps: data familiarization, initial code generation, theme searching, theme review, theme definition/naming, and report production. Results: Analysis of 19 selected papers revealed three primary use cases: patient-centric data management, supply chain management for data provenance, and digital twin development. Notably, most solutions were prototypes or frameworks without real-world implementations. Four overarching themes emerged: data governance (ownership, tracking, privacy), data monetization (commercialization, incentivization, sharing), data protection, and data storage. The focus lies on user-controlled, private, and secure health data solutions. Additionally, data commodification is explored, with mechanisms proposed to incentivize data maintenance and sharing. NFTs are also suggested for tracking medical products in supply chains, ensuring data integrity and provenance. Ethereum and similar platforms dominate NFT minting, while compact NFT storage options are being explored for faster data access. Conclusion: NFTs offer significant potential for secure, traceable, decentralized healthcare data exchange systems. However, challenges exist, including dependence on blockchain, interoperability issues, and associated costs. The review identified research gaps, such as developing dual ownership models and data pricing strategies. Building an open standard for interoperability and adoption is crucial. The scalability, security, and privacy of NFT-backed healthcare applications require further investigation. Thus, this study proposes a research agenda for adopting NFTs in healthcare, focusing on governance, storage models, and perceptions.

Indexed as

blockchaindata securityhealthcarehealth datanon-fungible tokens (NFTs)patient privacyresearch agendasystematic review

Identifiers

PMID38919876
PMCPMC11196843

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.