ArticlePloS one2026
Integrating medical imaging datasets with blockchain wallets: A case study on ARDS-COVID19 patients.
Article in PloS one, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Medical imaging plays a critical role in diagnosing and managing acute conditions such as Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS), particularly in intensive care settings. However, radiological data are often siloed across Picture Archiving and Communication Systems (PACS), with limited interoperability, traceability, and patient control. This paper proposes and validates a blockchain-enabled architecture that integrates radiological imaging data into a patient-controlled digital wallet (BioWallet) ecosystem. The system combines verifiable credentials, decentralized identifiers (DIDs), and a FHIR-compliant backend to ensure secure, auditable, and standards-based access to DICOM images and associated metadata. The ledger stores only consent and audit hashes, while clinical data remain off-chain and correctable within FHIR/EHR systems, ensuring auditability without hindering rectification. A validation scenario replicating an ICU emergency was conducted using synthetic ARDS-COVID19 cases to assess latency, consent enforceability, and user experience. Results showed a 67% reduction in image access time compared to traditional systems, 100% success in blocking unauthorized access, and high clinician satisfaction. The architecture supports FAIR-compliant reuse of annotated imaging datasets, enhances transparency in image-driven research, and aligns with GDPR and future European digital identity frameworks. This work demonstrates the feasibility and value of a decentralized, patient-centric approach to imaging data governance in high-stakes clinical environments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.