SynthesisJMIR medical informatics2026
Blockchain Smart Contracts for Automating Clinical Trials: Systematic Review and Proposed System Architecture.
Synthesis in JMIR medical informatics, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Blockchain technologies have revolutionized the financial sector through their ability to generate immutable, cryptographically secure records. Clinical trials and health care data possess several synergies with those of the financial sector, specifically pertaining to the importance of tamper-resistant recording of processes. The evolution of blockchain to autonomously execute tasks contingent upon predefined contractual terms via smart contracts (SCs) allows a dynamic chain of interlinked events to unfold independently and in sequence, with time-stamped records. In recent years, mistrust in clinical trial data has grown significantly. Recording the entire clinical trial lifecycle from application, registration, recruitment to conduct, finance management, statistical analysis, and reporting in an immutable, cryptographically secure ledger with SC execution of trial processes could limit the potential for human intervention and tampering. This would produce a time-stamped record of all events within the trial lifecycle. Leveraging the capabilities of SCs could alleviate recruitment challenges and address ongoing concerns regarding data transparency, ownership, and integrity that currently undermine clinical trial processes. Objective: This study aimed to review the existing literature on SC applications in clinical trials and propose a system architecture for using SCs to automate key processes throughout the clinical trial lifecycle. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, identifying peer-reviewed studies and open-source repositories pertaining to the implementation of SCs in clinical trials. Data were extracted specific to the stage of the trial lifecycle described, SC architecture, and technical specifications for real-world implementation. Data were synthesized to propose an architecture for automating clinical trial processes within the lifecycle using SCs. Results: A total of 144 records were screened; 10 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most implementations used private Ethereum-based networks (7/10, 70%). Reported applications included automated patient matching (5/10, 50%), consent management with dynamic permissioning (6/10, 60%), protocol enforcement and time-stamped audit logs (9/10, 90%), adverse event reporting (3/10, 30%), and financial or workflow automation (3/10, 30%). SC-based recruitment systems demonstrated rapid matching performance (eg, 6000 simulated patients matched in 2.13 s). However, all included systems were prototypes or simulations, and none were tested in real-world regulatory settings. Scalability, interoperability limitations, regulatory ambiguity (eg, General Data Protection Regulation right-to-erasure conflicts), and high infrastructural complexity were common gaps noted across studies. Conclusions: Current evidence suggests that SCs can enhance transparency, traceability, and automation throughout the clinical trial lifecycle. However, the literature remains dominated by simulation-based prototypes, primarily Ethereum-dependent architectures, and lacks analyses of cost-effectiveness, governance, and integration with institutional workflows. Future research should evaluate hybrid architectures, develop interoperability standards, and assess regulatory and ethical implications in real deployments.
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.