↓ Skip to main content

Analysis of Security Protocols for Mobile Healthcare

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Systems, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Analysis of Security Protocols for Mobile Healthcare
Published in
Journal of Medical Systems, September 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10916-016-0596-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mohammad Wazid, Sherali Zeadally, Ashok Kumar Das, Vanga Odelu

Abstract

Mobile Healthcare (mHealth) continues to improve because of significant improvements and the decreasing costs of Information Communication Technologies (ICTs). mHealth is a medical and public health practice, which is supported by mobile devices (for example, smartphones) and, patient monitoring devices (for example, various types of wearable sensors, etc.). An mHealth system enables healthcare experts and professionals to have ubiquitous access to a patient's health data along with providing any ongoing medical treatment at any time, any place, and from any device. It also helps the patient requiring continuous medical monitoring to stay in touch with the appropriate medical staff and healthcare experts remotely. Thus, mHealth has become a major driving force in improving the health of citizens today. First, we discuss the security requirements, issues and threats to the mHealth system. We then present a taxonomy of recently proposed security protocols for mHealth system based on features supported and possible attacks, computation cost and communication cost. Our detailed taxonomy demonstrates the strength and weaknesses of recently proposed security protocols for the mHealth system. Finally, we identify some of the challenges in the area of security protocols for mHealth systems that still need to be addressed in the future to enable cost-effective, secure and robust mHealth systems.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Malaysia 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 78 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 18%
Researcher 10 13%
Student > Bachelor 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Other 19 24%
Unknown 6 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 29 36%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 11%
Engineering 6 8%
Social Sciences 5 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Other 16 20%
Unknown 11 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 June 2017.
All research outputs
#18,556,449
of 22,982,639 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Systems
#817
of 1,158 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#244,056
of 321,237 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Systems
#24
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,982,639 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,158 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 321,237 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.