Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39423005›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2024

Automatic Recommender System of Development Platforms for Smart Contract-Based Health Care Insurance Fraud Detection Solutions: Taxonomy and Performance Evaluation.

Rima Kaafarani, Leila Ismail, Oussama Zahwe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Rima KaafaraniIntelligent Computing and Communication Systems Laboratory, Computer Science Department, American University of Culture and Education, Beirut, Lebanon.ORCID 0009-0009-2969-5727
Leila IsmailIntelligent Distributed Computing and Systems Laboratory, Department of Computer Science and Software Engineering, College of Information Technology, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.ORCID 0000-0003-0946-1818
Oussama ZahweVectrawave Device, Lannion, France.ORCID 0000-0002-7926-1910

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth care insurance fraud is on the rise in many ways, such as falsifying information and hiding third-party liability. This can result in significant losses for the medical health insurance industry. Consequently, fraud detection is crucial. Currently, companies employ auditors who manually evaluate records and pinpoint fraud. However, an automated and effective method is needed to detect fraud with the continually increasing number of patients seeking health insurance. Blockchain is an emerging technology and is constantly evolving to meet business needs. With its characteristics of immutability, transparency, traceability, and smart contracts, it demonstrates its potential in the health care domain. In particular, self-executable smart contracts are essential to reduce the costs associated with traditional paradigms, which are mostly manual, while preserving privacy and building trust among health care stakeholders, including the patient and the health insurance networks. However, with the proliferation of blockchain development platform options, selecting the right one for health care insurance can be difficult. This study addressed this void and developed an automated decision map recommender system to select the most effective blockchain platform for insurance fraud detection.

objectiveThis study aims to develop smart contracts for detecting health care insurance fraud efficiently. Therefore, we provided a taxonomy of fraud scenarios and implemented their detection using a blockchain platform that was suitable for health care insurance fraud detection. To automatically and efficiently select the best platform, we proposed and implemented a decision map-based recommender system. For developing the decision-map, we proposed a taxonomy of 102 blockchain platforms.

methodsWe developed smart contracts for 12 fraud scenarios that we identified in the literature. We used the top 2 blockchain platforms selected by our proposed decision-making map-based recommender system, which is tailored for health care insurance fraud. The map used our taxonomy of 102 blockchain platforms classified according to their application domains.

resultsThe recommender system demonstrated that Hyperledger Fabric was the best blockchain platform for identifying health care insurance fraud. We validated our recommender system by comparing the performance of the top 2 platforms selected by our system. The blockchain platform taxonomy that we created revealed that 59 blockchain platforms are suitable for all application domains, 25 are suitable for financial services, and 18 are suitable for various application domains. We implemented fraud detection based on smart contracts.

conclusionsOur decision map recommender system, which was based on our proposed taxonomy of 102 platforms, automatically selected the top 2 platforms, which were Hyperledger Fabric and Neo, for the implementation of health care insurance fraud detection. Our performance evaluation of the 2 platforms indicated that Fabric surpassed Neo in all performance metrics, as depicted by our recommender system. We provided an implementation of fraud detection based on smart contracts.

Indexed as

FraudInsurance, HealthBlockchainContractsHumansblockchainblockchain development platformeHealthfraud detectionfraud scenarioshealth carehealth care insurancehealth insurancemachine learningmedical informaticsrecommender systemsmart contracttaxonomy

Identifiers

PMID39423005
PMCPMC11530721

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.