\documentclass[10pt]{article}

\usepackage{fullpage}
\usepackage{CJKutf8} 
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage{setspace}
\usepackage{parskip}
\usepackage{titlesec}
\usepackage[section]{placeins}
\usepackage{xcolor}
\usepackage{breakcites}
\usepackage{lineno}
\usepackage{hyphenat}





\PassOptionsToPackage{hyphens}{url}
\usepackage[colorlinks = true,
            linkcolor = blue,
            urlcolor  = blue,
            citecolor = blue,
            anchorcolor = blue]{hyperref}
\usepackage{etoolbox}
\makeatletter
\patchcmd\@combinedblfloats{\box\@outputbox}{\unvbox\@outputbox}{}{%
  \errmessage{\noexpand\@combinedblfloats could not be patched}%
}%
\makeatother


\usepackage[round]{natbib}
\let\cite\citep




\renewenvironment{abstract}
  {{\bfseries\noindent{\abstractname}\par\nobreak}\footnotesize}
  {\bigskip}

\titlespacing{\section}{0pt}{*3}{*1}
\titlespacing{\subsection}{0pt}{*2}{*0.5}
\titlespacing{\subsubsection}{0pt}{*1.5}{0pt}


\usepackage{authblk}


\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage[space]{grffile}
\usepackage{latexsym}
\usepackage{textcomp}
\usepackage{longtable}
\usepackage{tabulary}
\usepackage{booktabs,array,multirow}
\usepackage{amsfonts,amsmath,amssymb}
\providecommand\citet{\cite}
\providecommand\citep{\cite}
\providecommand\citealt{\cite}
% You can conditionalize code for latexml or normal latex using this.
\newif\iflatexml\latexmlfalse
\providecommand{\tightlist}{\setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}\setlength{\parskip}{0pt}}%

\AtBeginDocument{\DeclareGraphicsExtensions{.pdf,.PDF,.eps,.EPS,.png,.PNG,.tif,.TIF,.jpg,.JPG,.jpeg,.JPEG}}

\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage[ngerman,english]{babel}










\begin{document}
\begin{CJK}{UTF8}{gbsn}

\title{The Blockchain Based Scientific Study}



\author[1]{Thomas F Heston}%
\affil[1]{Department of Medical Education and Clinical Sciences, Washington State University, Spokane, Washington USA}%


\vspace{-1em}



  
  \date{April 22, 2026}


\begingroup
\let\center\flushleft
\let\endcenter\endflushleft
\maketitle
\endgroup





\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{abstract}
Blockchain technology enables the creation of immutable, publicly
available data. Initial applications have been primarily in the fields
of finance (Bitcoin) and law (smart contracts), yet it can also help
advance science by reducing human bias.~ The blockchain can ensure that
hypotheses are not altered; that methods of data collection are
transparent; that results are publicly available for independent
analyses; and that conclusions are less biased. Our current system of
medical research suffers from too much bias. Blockchain technologies, by
creating immutable data, will lead to an increased confidence in
evidence based medicine.%
\end{abstract}%



\sloppy


\textbf{INTRODUCTION}

The scientific study is outdated and dead, at least as we know it.
Pharmaceutical companies pollute clinical trials with money, creating a
financial bias.~ Academics live under the rule of ``publish or perish'',
creating a career bias. Journal editors want notoriety for publicity
purposes, creating a publicity bias. In spite of established guidelines
for the publication of clinical research, they are often not followed
(Lee and Tse 2016).

Researcher bias creates bad science, and science as it is currently
practiced does not do enough to eliminate this bias. Guidelines still
allow raw research data to be withheld from the public, resulting in
author bias being inexorably embedded into the research. Similarly,
although disclosures of conflicts of interest are becoming more common,
they do not eliminate bias, they only recognize an existing bias (Lundh
et al. 2012).

The blockchain is a distributed database secured by the community. It
can be thought of as a ledger, with a single transaction per line. As
these lines of transactions add up, they are grouped into an encrypted
block. Each block is then connected to the previous block, back to the
first block in the chain. This blockchain technology was pioneered by
Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator of Bitcoin (Yli-Huumo et al. 2016).

The blockchain is revolutionary in that it produces data integrity
through a public network of nodes not dependent upon individuals. These
nodes all include copies of the blockchain. If one copy is
surreptitiously altered, it is quickly identified and promptly rejected.
Thus the blockchain contains immutable data that is highly trusted.

Instead of trusting a company, individual, or a government, the
blockchain widely distributes blocks throughout an open, global
community anyone can join. This low trust on the individual creates high
trust through the larger community. Everyone verifies the integrity of
everyone else's copy of the blockchain.

\textbf{REDUCING BIAS}

Not unlike the echo chamber effect observed in social media(Del Vicario
et al. 2016), journal editors become biased through repeated exposure to
the same researchers over and over again. Discussions at medical
meetings gravitate towards a few thought leaders, making their biases
everyone's bias. Academics dominate conversations, with relatively
little input from practicing clinicians. This low diversity of thought
creates a group think bias. The blockchain reduces this by making raw
research data immutable and publicly available. Anyone can re-analyze
the data, providing a second opinion. A time stamped record verifies
authorship and reduces bias (Irving and Holden 2016).

It is essential that the blockchain utilized to record the data is
trusted. Currently, the Bitcoin blockchain is the largest, most trusted,
and most immutable chain.~ To make scientific research data time stamped
and immutable, it is possible to utilize a side-chain of the Bitcoin
network (Back et al. 2014; Brown 2014).~ Another high trust possibility
is the development of decentralized applications (dapps) utilizing
Ethereum (Bahga and Madisetti 2017).

\textbf{THE BLOCKCHAIN BASED SCIENTIFIC STUDY}

Recording medical research on the blockchain will lead to rapid advances
in medical knowledge by creating an immutable record and by making the
analysis of research data less dependent upon a few individuals.

The blockchain based scientific study involves five key steps:

1. The hypothesis is first published on the blockchain.

2. The research methods are then published on the blockchain, including
details on how each item in the database was collected and coded, and
from what study population it came from.

3. Only after the above are published is the data collected.

4. The results, including the raw data, are then published on the
blockchain.

5. Finally, study conclusions are published on the blockchain.

Scientific rigor requires that there be full public access to the
hypothesis, methods, results (including raw data), and conclusions.

\textbf{BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENTATION}

Although the benefits of a distributed blockchain to create immutable
proof-of-existence and wide availability of research data, multiple
barriers exist including technological, financial, and cultural
barriers.

Blockchain technology remains a new field of cryptography and
distributed ledgers. The original white paper on the technology was
introduced back in 2008 by Satoshi Nakamoto (Nakamoto 2008), and has
been widely adopted in the form of digital money, Bitcoin. Yet in spite
of Bitcoin's global adoption, applications to fields outside of
cryptocurrency have been limited.~ The Ethereum blockchain is perhaps
the most advanced platform for the development of dapps. Many
applications built on the Ethereum platform aim to create decentralized
versions of existing apps such as Facebook or Google Docs, while others
aim to create smart contracts that create public, immutable records of
legal transactions such as land purchases (Hertig 2017). The
technological challenge facing implementation of a scientific research
database is significant. Software engineers would be working in mostly
uncharted territory, although they would be able to draw from a growing
foundation of related blockchain projects, many of which run on open
source software.

Financial challenges in setting up a research blockchain database would
be significant, likely running in the millions of US dollars. Many
blockchain companies have been able to overcome this challenge by
creating Initial Coin Offerings (ICO), which are a type of crowdfunding
(Marshall 2017).~ For an ICO to be successful, the company needs to show
investors they have a solid group of developers. In the still young
world of blockchain technology, finding such individuals who are not
already involved in a startup can be challenging. The potential
financial rewards, however, may balance the risks and hard work required
for such a scientific research blockchain implementation.

Finally, the development of a new scientific research dapp requires a
company culture that is open to innovation and new types of
collaboration. Companies or groups interested in developing a new
blockchain application must be flexible and have a willingness to change
their business model to allow working with start-ups, partners and
competitors. Letting go of centralized power and shifting to a
decentralized network will require a paradigm shift for many companies.

\textbf{CONCLUSION}

The scientific method of research has greatly advanced human society,
yet it suffers from excessive human bias and conflicts of interest.
Blockchain technology has the potential to be at the forefront of a
second scientific revolution by creating publicly available, immutable
data that anyone can read, evaluate, and re-analyze.

\textbf{BIBLIOGRAPHY}

Back, A., Corallo, M., Dashjr, L., Friedenbach, M., Maxwell, G., Miller,
A., Poelstra, A., Tim\selectlanguage{ngerman}ón, J. and Wuille, P. 2014. Enabling Blockchain
Innovations with Pegged Sidechains {[}Online{]}. Available at:
\url{https://www.blockstream.com/sidechains.pdf} {[}Accessed: 8 February
2017{]}.

Bahga, A. and Madisetti, V. 2017. Blockchain Applications: A Hands-On
Approach. 1st ed. VPT.

Brown, R.G. 2014. A simple explanation of Bitcoin ``Sidechains''
{[}Online{]}. Available at:
\url{https://gendal.me/2014/10/26/a-simple-explanation-of-bitcoin-sidechains/}
{[}Accessed: 6 February 2017{]}.

Del Vicario, M., Bessi, A., Zollo, F., Petroni, F., Scala, A.,
Caldarelli, G., Stanley, H.E. and Quattrociocchi, W. 2016. The spreading
of misinformation online. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences of the United States of America 113(3), pp. 554--559.

Hertig, A. 2017. The Next Wave of Ethereum Applications is Almost Here
{[}Online{]}. Available at:
\url{http://www.coindesk.com/next-wave-blockchain-ethereum-applications-almost/}
{[}Accessed: 13 June 2017{]}.

Irving, G. and Holden, J. 2016. How blockchain-timestamped protocols
could improve the trustworthiness of medical science. {[}version 2;
referees: 3 approved{]}. F1000Research 5, p. 222.

Lee, P.H. and Tse, A.C.Y. 2016. The quality of the reported sample size
calculations in randomized controlled trials indexed in PubMed. European
Journal of Internal Medicine 0(0), pp. 16--21.

Lundh, A., Sismondo, S., Lexchin, J., Busuioc, O.A. and Bero, L. 2012.
Industry sponsorship and research outcome. Cochrane Database of
Systematic Reviews 12, p. MR000033.

Marshall, A. 2017. ICO, Explained {[}Online{]}. Available at:
\url{https://cointelegraph.com/explained/ico-explained} {[}Accessed: 12
June 2017{]}.

Nakamoto, S. 2008. Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System~ . .
Available at: \url{https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf}.

Yli-Huumo, J., Ko, D., Choi, S., Park, S. and Smolander, K. 2016. Where
Is Current Research on Blockchain Technology?-A Systematic Review. Plos
One 11(10), p. e0163477.

--------------------------------------------------

\emph{This is an Authorea post-print. The original citation for this
manuscript is: Heston TF. The blockchain-based scientific study. Digit
Med {[}serial online{]} 2017 {[}cited~2017 Nov 13{]};3:66-8. Available
from:~}\href{http://www.digitmedicine.com/text.asp?2017/3/2/66/215026}{\emph{http://www.digitmedicine.com/text.asp?2017/3/2/66/215026}}\emph{~}

-------------------------------------------------

\par\null

\selectlanguage{english}
\FloatBarrier
\end{CJK}\end{document}

