ArticleJMIR bioinformatics and biotechnology2025
Decentralized Biobanking Apps for Patient Tracking of Biospecimen Research: Real-World Usability and Feasibility Study.
Article in JMIR bioinformatics and biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Blockchain-enabled digital twin systems in healthcare: a systematic scoping review of architectural integration, privacy, governance, ethical challenges, and regulatory solutions under GDPR and HIPAA.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Pooled it
- Blockchain for Digital Health Governance: Evidence Gap Map and Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Review
- Decentralized Biobanking Pathway to Precision Medicine: Futures Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Decentralized Biobanking Apps for Patient Tracking of Biospecimen Research: Real-World Usability and Feasibility Study.JMIR bioinformatics and biotechnology · 2025Article
- From ownership to custodianship: rethinking human biospecimens data governance in the Chinese context.Frontiers in genetics · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBiobank privacy policies strip patient identifiers from donated specimens, undermining transparency, utility, and value for patients, scientists, and society. We are advancing decentralized biobanking apps that reconnect patients with biospecimens and facilitate engagement through a privacy-preserving nonfungible token (NFT) digital twin framework. The decentralized biobanking platform was first piloted for breast cancer biobank members.
objectiveThis study aimed to demonstrate the technical feasibility of (1) patient-friendly biobanking apps, (2) integration with institutional biobanks, and (3) establishing the foundation of an NFT digital twin framework for decentralized biobanking.
methodsWe designed, developed, and deployed a decentralized biobanking mobile app for a feasibility pilot from 2021 to 2023 in the setting of a breast cancer biobank at a National Cancer Institute comprehensive cancer center. The Flutter app was integrated with the biobank's laboratory information management systems via an institutional review board-approved mechanism leveraging authorized, secure devices and anonymous ID codes and complemented with a nontransferable ERC-721 NFT representing the soul-bound connection between an individual and their specimens. Biowallet NFTs were held within a custodial wallet, whereas the user experiences simulated token-gated access to personalized feedback about collection and use of individual and collective deidentified specimens. Quantified app user journeys and NFT deployment data demonstrate technical feasibility complemented with design workshop feedback.
resultsThe decentralized biobanking app incorporated key features: "biobank" (learn about biobanking), "biowallet" (track personal biospecimens), "labs" (follow research), and "profile" (share data and preferences). In total, 405 pilot participants downloaded the app, including 361 (89.1%) biobank members. A total of 4 central user journeys were captured. First, all app users were oriented to the ≥60,000-biospecimen collection, and 37.8% (153/405) completed research profiles, collectively enhancing annotations for 760 unused specimens. NFTs were minted for 94.6% (140/148) of app users with specimens at an average cost of US $4.51 (SD US $2.54; range US $1.84-$11.23) per token, projected to US $17,769.40 (SD US $159.52; range US $7265.62-$44,229.27) for the biobank population. In total, 89.3% (125/140) of the users successfully claimed NFTs during the pilot, thereby tracking 1812 personal specimens, including 202 (11.2%) distributed under 42 unique research protocols. Participants embraced the opportunity for direct feedback, community engagement, and potential health benefits, although user onboarding requires further refinement.
conclusionsDecentralized biobanking apps demonstrate technical feasibility for empowering patients to track donated biospecimens via integration with institutional biobank infrastructure. Our pilot reveals potential to accelerate biomedical research through patient engagement; however, further development is needed to optimize the accessibility, efficiency, and scalability of platform design and blockchain elements, as well as a robust incentive and governance structure for decentralized biobanking.
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.