ArticleScientific reports2026
A study on physicians' perceptions of privacy in the context of the e-Nabiz (e-Pulse) in the Turkish healthcare system.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study examines physicians' perceptions of privacy and data protection in Turkey's national personal health record system, e-Nabız. While e-Nabız enhances continuity of care through centralized access to prescriptions, laboratory results, imaging, and clinical records, its centralized governance model raises concerns regarding unauthorized access, accountability, and alignment with professional privacy norms. To empirically investigate these concerns, we conducted a survey with 309 healthcare professionals. The results reveal a pronounced usage-trust paradox: although system usage is high (87%), only 56% of respondents consider existing data-protection mechanisms adequate, and a substantial proportion express concerns about potential misuse or leakage of health data. Importantly, physicians' concerns are not primarily directed at the absence of role-based access control (RBAC), but at the lack of verifiable enforcement, transparent oversight, and tamper-evident auditability of access decisions. This indicates a perceived misalignment between expected information flows grounded in the physician-patient confidentiality context and the opaque governance of access practices within the system. Based on these findings, the study derives a governance-oriented design implication: a supplementary layer in which RBAC decisions and access events are recorded through blockchain-supported immutable logs and smart contracts to enhance accountability and auditability. The proposed approach does not store medical data on the blockchain; rather, it aims to make authorization and access histories verifiable and resistant to manipulation. The study contributes a physician-centered empirical assessment of privacy governance in a nationwide digital health system and highlights the importance of transparent, enforceable access governance for sustaining professional trust.
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.