Investigating the intersections of vulnerability detection and Internet of Medical Things (IoMT) in healthcare, a scoping review protocol for Remote Patient Monitoring
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v13i6.46080Keywords:
Cyberattack; IoMT; Vulnerabilities; Internet of medical things; Knowledge graphs; Automated reasoning; Semantic modelling.Abstract
Due to the rapid and ubiquitous development and acceptance of IoT, healthcare providers have changed their locational settings from solely based in clinics to extend more broadly into the reach of patients’ domestic homes. This IoMT focus extends to various medical devices and applications within the healthcare domain, such as any form of smartphones, surveillance cameras, wearable sensors, and actuators, that hold the capability to access IoT technologies. The aim of this scoping review has two important objectives. The first is to understand the best approaches towards acquisition and refinement of data in favour of an optimised cyber security posture for remote patient monitoring. The second is to understand how best to detect cyberattacks and vulnerabilities in Medical IoTs using automated reasoning. The review will be carried out according to the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) scoping review methodology. The key information sources are Springer Link, IEEE Xplore, Science Direct, SCOPUS, and ACM databases. The search is limited to studies written in English. The initial step in the review uses keywords and index terms to identify literature from the selected database information sources. The second step then takes the identified elements and searches each of the databases. The third step involves a search of the references to determine literature inclusion using a full-text screening process. Medical IoT devices, specifically designed for patient monitoring and diagnosis, excel in their ability to collect, transfer, and interact with real-time data. It focuses on intersections between IoMTs, cyberattacks and vulnerabilities, knowledge graph detection, and automated reasoning.
References
Aranas, L. L., Alam, K., Gyawali, P., & Mahumud, R. A. (2023). Examining Drug-resistant tuberculosis stigma among health care workers toward the development of a stigma-reduction intervention: Protocol for a Scoping Review. JMIR Research Protocols, 12(1), e43084.
Arksey, H., & O'malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19-32.
Baghbanian, A., Merlin, T., Carter, D., & Wang, S. (2020). Methods for the health technology assessment of complex interventions: a protocol for a scoping review. BMJ open, 10(11), e039263.
Campos, L., Costa, D., Donato, H., Nunes, B., & Cruz, E. B. (2023). Implementation of digital health in rural populations with chronic musculoskeletal conditions: A scoping review protocol. Plos one, 18(12), e0291638.
Dean, J., Wray, A. J., Braun, L., Casello, J. M., McCallum, L., & Gower, S. (2019). Holding the keys to health? A scoping study of the population health impacts of automated vehicles. BMC Public Health, 19, 1-10.
Hall, P., Kroll, T., Hickey, J., Stokes, D., & Lennon, O. (2021). Patient and public involvement in stroke research: a scoping review protocol. HRB open research, 4.
Hercegovac, S., Kernot, J., & Stanley, M. (2019). How qualitative case study methodology informs occupational therapy practice: A scoping review. OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health (Thorofare N J), 1539449219850123. https://doi.org/10.1177/1539449219850123
Iannizzi, C., Akl, E. A., Kahale, L. A., Dorando, E., Aminat, A. M., Barker, J. M., ... & Skoetz, N. (2021). Methods and guidance on conducting, reporting, publishing and appraising living systematic reviews: a scoping review protocol. F1000Research, 10.
John, B., McCreary, C., & Roberts, A. (2022). Smartphone technology for communications between clinicians–A scoping review. Journal of Dentistry, 122, 104112.
Kirvin-Quamme, A., Kissinger, J., Quinlan, L., Montgomery, R., Chernenok, M., Pirner, M. C., ... & Robinson, A. (2024). Common practices for sociodemographic data reporting in digital mental health intervention research: a scoping review. BMJ open, 14(2), e078029.
Lockwood C, Tricco AC. (2020). Preparing scoping reviews for publication using methodological guides and reporting standards. Nursing and Health Sciences 2020;22 (1):1–4.
MacNeill, A. L., MacNeill, L., Doucet, S., & Luke, A. (2022). Professional representation of conversational agents for health care: a scoping review protocol. JBI Evidence Synthesis, 20(2), 666-673.
Mergen, M., Meyerheim, M., & Graf, N. (2023). Reviewing the current state of virtual reality integration in medical education–a scoping review protocol. Systematic Reviews, 12(1), 97.
Munn, Z., Peters, M. D., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A., & Aromataris, E. (2018). Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18, 1-7.
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., ... & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372.
Peters, M. D., Godfrey, C., McInerney, P., Munn, Z., Tricco, A. C., & Khalil, H. (2020). Chapter 11: scoping reviews (2020). JBI manual for evidence synthesis. Retrieved January 2024, from https://jbi-global-wiki.refined.site/space/MANUAL/4687342/Chapter+11%3A+Scoping+reviews
Peterson, J., Pearce, P. F., Ferguson, L. A., & Langford, C. A. (2017). Understanding scoping reviews: Definition, purpose, and process. Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners, 29(1), 12–16.
Pollock, D., Tricco, A. C., Peters, M. D., Mclnerney, P. A., Khalil, H., Godfrey, C. M., ... & Munn, Z. (2022). Methodological quality, guidance, and tools in scoping reviews: a scoping review protocol. JBI evidence synthesis, 20(4), 1098-1105.
Reid, A. E., Doucet, S., Luke, A., Azar, R., & Horsman, A. R. (2019). The impact of patient navigation: a scoping review protocol. JBI Evidence Synthesis, 17(6), 1079-1085.
Smith, T., Lee, KH., Yu, K., Armstrong, L., Cook, D. M. (2022). Exploring issues of Resilience and Technology Use for Older People - A scoping review protocol. Research, Society and Development, 11(15), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v11i15.37773.
Stewart, L. A., Clarke, M., Rovers, M., Riley, R. D., Simmonds, M., Stewart, G., & Tierney, J. F. (2015). Preferred reporting items for a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data: the PRISMA-IPD statement. Jama, 313(16), 1657-1665.
Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O’Brien K, Colquhoun H, Kastner M, et al. (2016). A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2016;16 (1):15.
Yanez, R. J. V., Fernandes, A. F. C., Mattos, S. M., Moreira, T. M. M., Castro, R. C. M. B., de Freitas Corpes, E., & Lopes-Júnior, L. C. (2023). Palliative care in the treatment of women with breast cancer: a scoping review protocol. BMJ Open, 13(6), e068236.
Yii, V., Palermo, C., & Kleve, S. (2020). Population‐based interventions addressing food insecurity in Australia: A systematic scoping review. Nutrition & Dietetics, 77(1), 6-18.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Kulsoom S. Bughio; David M. Cook; Afaq Shah
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
3) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
