Towards a comprehensive understanding of blockchain technology adoption in various industries in developing and emerging economies: a systematic review

Figures & data

Table 1. Blockchain technology application in various industries.

Industries/sectors	Application	Description	Sources
Logistics and transportation	La’Zooz, CoRide and FICA	Blockchain-based carpooling applications based on intelligent transport system (ITS) which are decentralized, anonymous, private and ride-sharing networks that are auditable and thus providing optimization of vacant seats and idle cargo spaces (Yong & Wang, 2016)	Çaldağ and Gökalp (2020)
	CarbonCount	A blockchain-based ITS application specifically used to calculate the individual carbon footprint using analyzed data on personal mobility	Lopez and Farooq (2018)
	Semi-Controlled Traffic Signal Control (SCTSC)	Support traffic signaling automation so that there is greater efficiency of the control and management of traffic	Cheng et al. (2019)
	Chorus Mobility	A decentralized system combining vehicular ad-hoc networks (VANET) and Ethereum for provision of services and enforcement of rules on smart transportation system	Leiding and Vorobev (2018)
Agriculture supply chain	BRUSCHETTA	An IoT blockchain-based framework to certify extra virgin olive oil supply chain	Arena et al. (2019)
	Food traceability solution	The use of blockchain, smart contract tokens and IoT in designing solution for food traceability	Kim et al. (2019)
	Traceability system for tea quality safety management	Use of blockchain in developing a traceability system to ensure quality safety management for tea	Liao and Xu (2019)
Education	Management of records	Blockchain is also used for managing academic degrees and summative results in a more effective manner	Skiba (2017)
	Management of online platform	Managing online courses, group meetings, presentation and research skills	Sharples and Domingue (2016)
	Managing online learning	Higher institutions like Nicosia university, Sony Global schooling and Holberton school are among those using blockchain for managing online learning	Skiba (2017) and Ullah et al. (2021)
Healthcare	Drugledger	The system provides information on drug ledger and the physical flow of drugs in the chain network of drugs	Konapure and Nawale (2022)
	Gcoin	Provides global control and changes the regulating role of drug supply chain system to inspection of drugs and surveillance	Almutairi et al. (2022)
	EMR management such as HealthChain, Ancile, MedRec, MedBlock, BlockHIE, FHIR and MedShare Secured Mobile Enabled Assisting Device (SMEAD) MIStore and Pokitdok	Electronic medical record (EMR) for managing patients’ health and personal records with assurance of confidentiality, scalability and security; An end-to-end secure system for monitoring patients with diabetes; Blockchain based medical insurance storage system as an initiative to resolve insurance claim in healthcare	Ahram et al. (2017), Dagher et al. (2018), Azaria et al. (2016), Fan et al. (2018), Jiang et al. (2018), Xia et al. (2017), Saravanan et al. (2017), Zhou et al. (2018) and Engelhardt (2017)

Table 2. Summary of reviews on blockchain technology adoption.

Article (year)	Period of publication	Number of articles	Industries	Aspects of BC adoption
				1	2	3	4	5
Duan et al. (2020)	2008–2019	26	Supply Chain	×	✓	✓	×	×
Upadhyay et al. (2021)	2017–2021	71	Automotive	×	✓	✓	✓	×
Vu et al. (2021)	2009–2020	69	Supply Chain	∼	×	×	∼	✓
Loukil et al. (2021)	2016–2020	80	Education	×	✓	✓	×	×
Batubara et al. (2018)	2016–2017	21	e-government	×	×	×	×	×
Bazel et al. (2023)	2017–2022	12	Healthcare	✓	✓	∼	✓	∼

Note: Aspects: 1: adoption factors; 2: benefits; 3: challenges; 4: model/theory approach; 5: barriers to adoption; symbol: (✓) covered; (×) not covered; (∼) partially covered;.

Figure 1. Initial search hits on Science Direct and Google Scholar for BC technology adoption and application in healthcare.

Table 3. Inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Criteria	Description
Inclusion	Articles are published between 2019 and 2023 Contents focused on BC technology adoption, acceptance or readiness Articles is written in English
Exclusion	Articles published before 2019 Articles published in other languages besides the English language Contents is on BC application, principles and other aspects but not about adoption, acceptance and readiness.

Figure 2. Screening and selection process.

Figure 3. Blockchain adoption studies according to industry type.

Table 4. Classification of studies based on industries.

Industry	Year of publication
	2019	2020	2021	2022	2023	Total number of articles
Agriculture	0	2	1	0	1	4
Education	1	2	3	1	1	8
Energy	0	1	0	1	0	2
Finance and banking	2	2	3	3	2	12
Healthcare	1	0	5	2	1	9
Logistics	0	1	0	1	2	4
Manufacturing	0	0	1	0	0	1
Maritime	1	0	1	0	0	2
Oil and gas	0	0	1	0	0	1
SMEs	1	1	1	0	1	4
Supply chain	2	7	3	5	1	18
Tourism	1	0	0	0	0	1
General	1	4	6	3	1	15
Total per year	10	20	25	16	10	81

Figure 4. Distribution of studies based on countries.

Figure 5. Type of articles.

Table 5. Underlying theories used in the studies.

Theories	Usage	Usage in different industries
		1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13
TAM	27		✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓		✓	✓	✓	✓
TOE	18	✓	✓		✓	✓	✓				✓	✓		✓
UTAUT	18				✓	✓	✓					✓	✓	✓
DOI	10		✓	✓	✓	✓					✓	✓	✓	✓
TRI	5		✓					✓					✓	✓
TPB	5		✓		✓			✓						✓
TTF	5					✓					✓	✓
NAM	2					✓
FVM	1													✓
ISS	1											✓
CSF model	1				✓
Stakeholder theory	1				✓
Connectivism theory	1												✓
Extended TAM	2		✓											✓
Extended UTAUT	1			✓
TAM and TPB	1		✓
TAM and TOE	2		✓									✓
TAM and TRI	2		✓
TAM and DOI	3		✓	✓	✓
TAM and TTF	1					✓
TAM and UTAUT	1											✓
TAM, TPB and TRI	2							✓						✓
TAM, TPB and UTAUT	1													✓
TAM, TOE and DOI	2										✓	✓
TAM, TRA and UTAUT													✓
UTAUT and NAM	2					✓
UTAUT, TTF and ISS model	1											✓
UTAUT and TOE	1											✓
UTAUT and connectivism theory	1												✓
DOI and TOE	3					✓						✓		✓
TOE, FVM, TTF, DOI, UTAUT and others	1													✓
Stakeholder theory and CSF model	1				✓

Note: 1: agriculture; 2: education; 3: energy; 4: finance and banking; 5: healthcare; 6: logistics; 7: manufacturing; 8: maritime; 9: oil and gas; 10: SMEs; 11: supply chain; 12: tourism; 13: general.

Table 6. Use of TAM and UTAUT variables in the studies.

Theory	Factors	Referred articles
		1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14
TAM	PU	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑
	PEOU	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑
		15	16	17	18	19	20	21	22	23	24
UTAUT	EEXP	☑	☑	☑	☒	☑	☑	☒	☑	☑	☒
	EPER	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑	☒	☑	☑	☑	☒
	SOCI	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑	☑
	FC	☒	☑	☒	☒	☑	☒	☑	☑	☑	☒

Note: ☑: used and significant predictor; ☑: use but insignificant predictor; ☒: not used in the study; 1: Altamimi et al. (2022); 2: Iftikhar et al. (2021); 3: Wan Muhamad et al. (2020); 4: Mat Razali et al. (2021); 5: Ullah et al. (2021); 6: Borhani et al. (2021); 7: Kabir and Islam (2021); 8: Soon (2019); 9: Kuberkar and Singhal (2021); 10 –Bhardwaj et al. (2021); 11: Gao and Li (2021); 12: Chengyue et al. (2021); 13: Knauer and Mann (2020); 14: Sciarelli et al. (2021); 15: Abu Afifa et al. (2022); 16: Latif and Zakaria (2020); 17: Hira et al. (2022); 18: Kapnissis et al. (2022); 19: L.-T. Nguyen et al. (2023); 20: Khazaei (2020); 21: Wamba and Queiroz (2019); 22: Queiroz et al. (2020); 23: Wahab et al. (2020); 24: Nuryyev et al. (2020).

Table 7. Identified factors of TOE framework in the studies.

Domains of TOE	Identified factors	Article source
Technology	Relative advantage/comparative advantage	Agi and Jha (2022), Bhardwaj et al. (2021), Iftikhar et al. (2021), Kulkarni and Patil (2020), Lei (2022), Vu et al. (2022) and Wong et al. (2020)
	Compatibility	Agi and Jha (2022), Bhardwaj et al. (2021), Fernando et al. (2021), Kulkarni and Patil (2020), Orji et al. (2020) and Vu et al. (2022)
	Complexity	Agi and Jha (2022), Bhardwaj et al. (2021), Choi et al. (2020), Lu et al. (2021), Orji et al. (2020), Vu et al. (2022) and Wong et al. (2019)
	Perceived security and privacy	Choi et al. (2020), Kulkarni and Patil (2020) and Orji et al. (2020)
	Scalability concern	Choi et al. (2020) and Iftikhar et al. (2021)
	Technology competence	Fernando et al. (2021) and Hader et al. (2020)
	Cost	Choi et al. (2020) and Vu et al. (2022)
	Interoperability	Dehghani et al. (2022)
	Technological volatility	Dehghani et al. (2022)
	Data quality	Abu Rumman and Al-Abbadi (2023) and Dehghani et al. (2022)
	Specific BC tools availability	Orji et al. (2020)
	Infrastructural facility	Orji et al. (2020)
	Perceived benefits	Orji et al. (2020)
	Technology readiness	Bhardwaj et al. (2021)
	Maturity	Choi et al. (2020)
	Ease of being tried and observed	Orji et al. (2020)
Organization	Top management support	Bhardwaj et al. (2021), Fernando et al. (2021), Hader et al. (2020), Iftikhar et al. (2021), Lu et al. (2021), Orji et al. (2020) and Wong et al. (2019)
	Firm scope/firm size	Fernando et al. (2021), Kulkarni and Patil (2020), Orji et al. (2020) and Vu et al. (2022)
	Organization readiness	Agi and Jha (2022), Lu et al. (2021) and Vu et al. (2022)
	Perceived cost of investment	Bhardwaj et al. (2021), Orji et al. (2020) and Wong et al. (2019)
	Organizational culture	Kulkarni and Patil (2020) and Orji et al. (2020)
	Technological knowledge, expertise	Choi et al. (2020) and Dehghani et al. (2022)
	Corporate social responsibility	Lu et al. (2021)
	Presence of training facilities	Orji et al. (2020)
	Service quality	Lei (2022)
	Information quality	Lei (2022)
	Capability of human resources	Orji et al. (2020)
	Resources	Vu et al. (2022)
	Security	Bhardwaj et al. (2021)
	Technology awareness	Choi et al. (2020)
	Perceived risk of vendor lock-in	Choi et al. (2020)
	Perceived effort in collaboration	Choi et al. (2020)
	Innovativeness	Vu et al. (2022)
Environment	Competitive pressure, trend of pressure	Fernando et al. (2021), Hader et al. (2020), Iftikhar et al. (2021), Kulkarni and Patil (2020), Lei (2022), Lu et al. (2021), Orji et al. (2020) and Wong et al. (2019)
	Regulatory policies/regulatory uncertainties	Bhardwaj et al. (2021), Dehghani et al. (2022), Iftikhar et al. (2021) and Vu et al. (2022)
	Government policy and support	Choi et al. (2020), Lu et al. (2021) and Orji et al. (2020)
	Market turbulence/market dynamic	Orji et al. (2020) and Wong et al. (2019)
	Stakeholder pressure	Orji et al. (2020)
	Vendor support	Bhardwaj et al. (2021)
	Influence from consumer	Vu et al. (2022)
	Influence from other organization	Vu et al. (2022)
	Customer readiness	Kulkarni and Patil (2020)
	Network enhancement	Dehghani et al. (2022)
	Standardization uncertainty	Dehghani et al. (2022)
	Individual innovativeness	Lei (2022)
	Institutional-based trust	Orji et al. (2020)
	Perceived constraint of infrastructure	Choi et al. (2020)

Table 8. Other adoption factors included in the studies.

Theoretical source	Factors	Referred articles
TPB	Attitude	Altamimi et al. (2022), Hao et al. (2020), Ullah et al. (2021) and Vu et al. (2022)
	Subjective norm	Gao and Li (2021) and Ullah et al. (2021)
	Perceived behavioural control	Ullah et al. (2021)
	Computer self-efficacy	Abu Afifa et al. (2022)
TRI	Optimism	Mat Razali et al. (2021), Wan Muhamad et al. (2020) and Ullah et al. (2021)
	Innovativeness	Chengyue et al. (2021), Khazaei (2020), Mat Razali et al. (2021), Ullah et al. (2021) and Wan Muhamad et al. (2020)
	Insecurity	Al-Faouri et al. (2023), Ullah et al. (2021) and Wan Muhamad et al. (2020)
	Discomfort	Mat Razali et al. (2021), Ullah et al. (2021) and Wan Muhamad et al. (2020)
Task technology fit	Data security	Liang et al. (2021)
	Data processing	Liang et al. (2021)
	Compatibility needs	Liang et al. (2021)
	Task-technology fit	Almasarweh et al. (2013), Hao et al. (2020) and Khazaei (2020)
Norm activation model	Personal norm	Hira et al. (2021)
	Ascription of responsibility	Hira et al. (2021)
	Awareness of consequence	Hira et al. (2021)
Trust model	Trust	Abu Afifa et al. (2022), Chengyue et al. (2021), Çolak and Kağnıcıoğlu (2022), Fernando et al. (2021), Gao and Li (2021), Hafide et al. (2020), Hao et al. (2020), Hira et al. (2021), Jena (2022), Khazaei (2020), Latif and Zakaria (2020), Lu et al. (2021), H.-B. Nguyen and Nguyen (2021), Nuryyev et al. (2020), Queiroz et al. (2020), Saurabh and Dey (2021), Ullah et al. (2022) and Wong et al. (2020)
BC characteristics	Dis-intermediation	Rejeb et al. (2022) and Saurabh and Dey (2021)
	Traceability	Abu Rumman and Al-Abbadi (2023), Elhidaoui et al. (2022), Fernando et al. (2021), Pradana et al. (2023), Rejeb et al. (2022) and Saurabh and Dey (2021)
	Coordination/control	Saurabh and Dey (2021)
	Compliance	Saurabh and Dey (2021)
	Perceived convenience	Altamimi et al. (2022)
	Trialability	Knauer and Mann (2020), Soon (2019) and Ullah et al. (2021)
	Timeliness	Borhani et al. (2021)
	Impartiality	Borhani et al. (2021)
	Verifiability	Borhani et al. (2021)
	Error free	Borhani et al. (2021)
	Observability/visibility	Fernando et al. (2021) and Soon (2019)
	Immutability	Fernando et al. (2021) and Rejeb et al. (2022)
	Decentralization	Rejeb et al. (2022)
	Transparency	Elhidaoui et al. (2022) and Rejeb et al. (2022)
	Information sharing	Rejeb et al. (2022)
	Interoperability	Rejeb et al. (2022)
	Increased operational efficiencies	Rejeb et al. (2022)
	Improved decision making	Rejeb et al. (2022)
	Enhanced collaboration	Rejeb et al. (2022)
	Incentivization	Rejeb et al. (2022)
	Tokenization	Elhidaoui et al. (2022)
	Authentication	Fernando et al. (2021)
Others	Job relevance	Abu Afifa et al. (2022) and Wan Muhamad et al. (2020)
	Accounting information quality	Abu Afifa et al. (2022)
	Personal enjoyment	Gao and Li (2021)
	Functional benefits	Liang et al. (2021)
	Symbolic benefits	Liang et al. (2021)
	Functional benefits	Nuryyev et al. (2020)

Table 9. Benefits, challenges and barriers of BC technology adoption.

Industries	Benefits	Challenges	Barriers
Agriculture	Existing BC-based platform such as HARA assist the agricultural industry to story, process activity data and transaction (Rijanto, 2021).	The integration of BC technology is strongly related to labor conditions, financing accessibility and social responsibility. Thus, adapting to this technology is required (Pradana et al., 2023).	Main adoption barriers among Agricultural stakeholders include lacking in government regulation and trust issue (Yadav et al., 2020).
Education	BC technology enables users in ideas and concept exchange, integration of a tracking system for learning result, regulation of payment and contracts, assessment of learning and recording progress of students’ academic and facilitation of peer teaching (Eaganathan et al., 2019).	Acceptance of BC technology in education could be hampered by privacy challenges as some educational institutions may have low degree of openness of its learning resources (Ullah et al., 2021).	Doubt and readiness to accept the introduction of new technology like BC among users are a critical challenge to successful application of BC in education (Wan Muhamad et al, 2020).
Energy	BC technology supports the improvement in the energy sector, particularly on zero carbon production (Ullah et al., 2020).	As with other new platforms, BC-based platforms must also attract adequately large number of market participants so that there are positive network externalities (Burger & Weinmann, 2022).	Inter-platform competition (technological constraints and platform competition), value proposition and business strategy (focus was on products, platforms and transaction rather than procedural use cases offering standardization and low level of inclusiveness regarding processes) and regulatory complexity were identified as barriers in energy organizations (Burger & Weinmann, 2022).
Finance and banking	Positive impact on government policy, internet infrastructure and financial literacy, transaction cost and risk analysis to improve profitability and performance of bank (Aketch et al., 2021).	The use of bitcoin and cryptocurrency has been associated with money laundering and terrorism financing, thus, posing some strict regulations from the government (Onyekwere et al. 2023).	Management leadership buy-in, transaction cost efficiency and storage, energy efficiency, scalability, security and integrity, user data privacy, user engagement and desirability, ease of local and international legislation and regulation, personnel training, availability of fund for implementation, professional consultation and advisory capability, blockchain talent availability, integration with other e-commerce platforms and cloud services, incentive for miners, robustness of smart contract and deployment of business case, full ecosystem interoperability, technological maturity and standardization (Mishra et al., 2023).
Healthcare	In ophthalmology BC has transformed the network, enabling transparency as well as efficient large-volume data sharing across digital platforms while upholding integrity at all transactions (Gurnani et al., 2023).	BC addresses the problem of regulatory and government readiness, business entity readiness, solution providers readiness, end-user readiness (Sanda et al., 2022).	Key facilitating conditions must be attained to ensure successful BC technology adoption which include supportive regulatory and legal structures, innovation propensity, privacy and trust (Balasubramanian et al., 2020). Hira et al. (2022) is concerned that health information technology does not protect patient confidentiality. Lacking in data storage capability, data privacy and security, data standardization, BC infrastructure; existence of issues such as high data ownership, scalability, high cost of development and maintenance, exposing patient to high risk on data breach and theft, poor vision for project implementation, high level of management’s support that is lukewarm, lacking in technical expert capable of handling high complexity of the technology, lack of infrastructure related to BC, lack of data privacy and security are adoption barriers identified in Sharma and Joshi (2020).
Logistics	Transparency, traceability and security for logistic sector are significant benefits stated in Lim and Kamaruddin (2023).	As an emerging trend, social acceptance and workers’ attitude towards BC technology is considered as a major challenge (Lim & Kamaruddin, 2023).	Lack of proper government regulation and absence of regulatory standards are major barriers of BC technology adoption (Yadav et al., 2020).
Maritime	Maritime companies that use disruptive technology like BC earlier than others could potentially become more competitive and provides these companies with advantages (Balci & Surucu-Balci, 2021)	Scalability, interoperability, uncertainty in government regulations and data management are ongoing challenges in BC application (Balci & Surucu-Balci, 2021).	Lacking in government regulation, trust, privacy, knowledge and understanding of BC, support from influencing stakeholders as well as concerns on business information sharing, resistance of some stakeholders to adopt are among barriers of adoption (Balci & Surucu-Balci, 2021).
Oil and gas	Close relationship with suppliers and customers, application of just in time management and strategic planning, enabling outsourcing to many suppliers, e-procurement, third party logistics, subcontracting impact positively in operational performance with BC are benefits for maritime organizations (Aslam et al., 2021).	Due to challenges in security and need for high degree of coordination, the transformation of companies into BC-based operations might take many years to become a reality (Aslam et al., 2021).	Oil industry has complex supply-chain networks and the integration of blockchain needs to consider these complexities (Aslam et al., 2021).
Supply chain	BC enabling automatic processes in a holistic way over several business partners, cost benefit with bullwhip effect reduction, enhanced transparency from smart contract, data verifiability, zero alteration of data and enabling product and service tracking, traceability and BC as a single source of information with multiple sources integrated as a single source (Jardim et al., 2021).	Choice of business partner influence the acceptance of solution as the whole supply must have readiness for adoption so that there are assistance and support to mitigate trust issues (Jardim et al., 2021).	Lack of management vision to accept BC technology in th industry, concerns on privacy, cultural difference among supply chain partners, regulatory uncertainty, technological immaturity, lack of awareness about benchmarking and benefits are adoption barriers (Bag et al., 2021). Barrier factors—technological (cost, immaturity, incompatibility, complexity, scalability, insecurity and privacy concerns); organizational (technological awareness, knowledge and expertise, perceived risk of vendor lock-in, perceived effort in collaboration); and environmental (perceived constraints of government support, proper regulations and infrastructure) are barriers for BC adoption (Choi et al., 2020).

Çaldağ, M. T., & Gökalp, E. (2020). Exploring critical success factors for blockchain-based intelligent transportation systems. Emerging Science Journal, 4(special issue), 27–44. https://doi.org/10.28991/esj-2020-SP1-03

 Google Scholar

Lopez, D., & Farooq, B. (2018). A blockchain framework for smart mobility. In 2018 IEEE International Smart Cities Conference (ISC2) (pp. 1–7). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISC2.2018.8656927

 Google Scholar

Cheng, L., Liu, J., Xu, G., Zhang, Z., Wang, H., Dai, H.-N., Wu, Y., & Wang, W. (2019). SCTSC: A semi-centralized traffic signal control mode with attribute-based blockchain in IoTs. IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems, 6(6), 1373–1385. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCSS.2019.2904633

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Leiding, B., & Vorobev, W. V. (2018). Enabling the V2X economy revolution using a blockchain-based value transaction layer for vehicular ad-hoc networks. In Proceeding of the 12th Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems (MCIS), Corfu, Greece (pp. 1–31). The Association for Information Systems (AIS).

 Google Scholar

Arena, A., Bianchini, A., Perazzo, P., Vallati, C., & Dini, G. (2019). BRUSCHETTA: An IoT blockchain-based framework for certifying extra virgin olive oil supply chain. In 2019 IEEE International Conference on Smart Computing (SMARTCOMP) (pp. 173–179). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/SMARTCOMP.2019.00049

 Google Scholar

Kim, M., Hilton, B., Burks, Z., & Reyes, J. (2019). Integrating blockchain, smart contract-tokens, and IoT to design a food traceability solution. In 2018 IEEE 9th Annual Information Technology, Electronics and Mobile Communication Conference (IEMCON) (pp. 335–340). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/IEMCON.2018.8615007

 Google Scholar

Liao, Y., & Xu, K. (2019). Traceability system of agricultural product based on block-chain and application in tea quality safety management. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1288(012062), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1288/1/012062

 Google Scholar

Skiba, D. J. (2017). The potential of blockchain in education and health care. Nursing Education Perspectives, 38(4), 220–221. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.NEP.0000000000000190

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Sharples, M., & Domingue, J. (2016). The Blockchain and Kudos: A distributed system for educational record, reputation and reward. In K. Verbert, M. Sharples, & T. Klobučar (Eds.), Adaptive and Adaptable Learning. EC-TEL 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (vol 9891). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45153-4_48

 Google Scholar

Ullah, N., Al-Rahmi, W. M., Alzahrani, A. I., Alfarraj, O., & Alblehai, F. M. (2021). Blockchain technology adoption in smart learning environments. Sustainability, 13(4), 1801. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041801

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Konapure, R. R., & Nawale, S. D. (2022, May 8). Smart contract system architecture for pharma supply chain. In Proceedings of the 2022 International Conference on IoT and Blockchain Technology (ICIBT) (pp. 1–5). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIBT52874.2022.9807744

 Google Scholar

Almutairi, K., Hosseini Dehshiri, S. J., Hosseini Dehshiri, S. S., Hoa, A. X., Arockia Dhanraj, J., Mostafaeipour, A., Issakhov, A., & Techato, K. (2022). Blockchain technology application challenges in renewable energy supply chain management. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International, 30(28), 72041–72058. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-18311-7

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Ahram, T., Sargolzaei, A., Sargolzaei, S., Daniels, J., & Amaba, B. (2017). Blockchain technology innovations. In 2017 IEEE Technology & Engineering Management Conference (TEMSCON), Santa Clara, CA, USA (pp. 137–141). https://doi.org/10.1109/TEMSCON.2017.7998367

 Google Scholar

Dagher, G. G., Mohler, J., Milojkovic, M., Marella, P. B., & Marella, B. (2018). Ancile: Privacy-preserving framework for access control and interoperability of electronic health records using blockchain technology. Sustainable Cities and Society, 39, 283–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2018.02.014

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Azaria, A., Ekblaw, A., Vieira, T., & Lippman, A. (2016, August 24). MedRec: Using blockchain for medical data access and permission management. In 2016 2nd International Conference on Open and Big Data (OBD) (pp. 25–30). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/OBD.2016.11

 Google Scholar

Fan, K., Wang, S., Ren, Y., Li, H., & Yang, Y. (2018). MedBlock: Efficient and secure medical data sharing via blockchain. Journal of Medical Systems, 42(8), 136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-018-0993-7

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Jiang, S., Cao, J., Wu, H., Yang, Y., Ma, M., & He, J. (2018, June 20). BlocHIE: A BLOCkchain-based platform for healthcare information exchange. In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Smart Computing (SMARTCOMP)(pp. 49–56). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/SMARTCOMP.2018.00073

 Google Scholar

Xia, Q., Sifah, E. B., Asamoah, K. O., Gao, J., Du, X., & Guizani, M. (2017). MeDShare: Trust-less medical data sharing among cloud service providers via blockchain. IEEE Access, 5, 14757–14767. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2017.2730843

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Saravanan, M., Shubha, R., Marks, A. M., & Iyer, V. (2017, December 17–20). SMEAD: A secured mobile enabled assisting device for diabetics monitoring. In 2017 IEEE International Conference on Advanced Networks and Telecommunications Systems (ANTS) (pp. 1–6). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ANTS.2017.8384099

 Google Scholar

Zhou, L., Wang, L., & Sun, Y. (2018). MIStore: A blockchain-based medical insurance storage system. Journal of Medical Systems, 42(8), 149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-018-0996-4

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Engelhardt, M. A. (2017). Hitching healthcare to the chain: An introduction to blockchain technology in the healthcare sector. Technology Innovation Management Review, 7(10), 22–34. https://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1111

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Duan, J., Zhang, C., Gong, Y., Brown, S., & Li, Z. (2020). A content-analysis based literature review in blockchain adoption within food supply chain. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(5), 1784. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17051784

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Upadhyay, A., Ayodele, J. O., Kumar, A., & Garza-Reyes, J. A. (2021). A review of challenges and opportunities of blockchain adoption for operational excellence in the UK automotive industry. Journal of Global Operations and Strategic Sourcing, 14(1), 7–60. https://doi.org/10.1108/JGOSS-05-2020-0024

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Vu, N., Ghadge, A., & Bourlakis, M. (2021). Blockchain adoption in food supply chains: A review and implementation framework. Production Planning & Control, 34(6), 506–523. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2021.1939902

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Loukil, F., Abed, M., & Boukadi, K. (2021). Blockchain adoption in education: A systematic literature review. Education and Information Technologies, 26(5), 5779–5797. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10481-8

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Batubara, F. R., Ubacht, J., & Janssen, M. (2018). Challenges of blockchain technology adoption for e-government: A systematic literature review. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research: Governance in the Data Age (pp. 1–9). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3209281.3209317

 Google Scholar

Bazel, M. A., Mohammed, F., & Ahmad, M. (2023). A systematic review on the adoption of blockchain technology in the healthcare industry. EAI Endorsed Transactions on Pervasive Health and Technology, 9(e4), e4. https://doi.org/10.4108/eetpht.v9i.2844

 Google Scholar

Altamimi, A., Al-Bashayreh, M., Al-Oudat, M., & Almajali, D. (2022). Blockchain technology adoption for sustainable learning. International Journal of Data and Network Science, 6(3), 983–994. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.ijdns.2022.1.013

 Google Scholar

Iftikhar, W., Vistro, D. M., & Mahmood, Z. (2021). Blockchain technology adoption by Malaysian higher education institutes: A perspective of integrated TAM model and TOE framework. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Integrated Intelligent Computing Communication & Security (ICIIC 2021) (pp. 606–617). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/ahis.k.210913.077

 Google Scholar

Wan Muhamad, W. N., Afiza, N., Wook, M., Khalil, K., Mohd, N., Asiakin, N., & Ramli, S. (2020). Evaluation of blockchain-based data sharing acceptance among intelligence community. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 11(12), 597–606. https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2020.0111270

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Mat Razali, N. A., Wan Muhamad, W. N., Ishak, K. K., Saad, N. J. A. M., Wook, M., & Ramli, S. (2021). Secure blockchain-based data-sharing model and adoption among intelligence communities. IAENG International Journal of Computer Science, 48(1), 1–17.

 Google Scholar

Borhani, S. A., Babajani, J., Vanani, I. R., Anaqiz, S. S., & Jamaliyanpour, M. (2021). Adopting block chain technology to improve financing reporting by using the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). International Journal of Finance and Managerial Accounting, 6(22), 155–171.

 Google Scholar

Kabir, M. R., & Islam, M. A. (2021). Behavioural intention to adopt blockchain technology in Bangladesh banking companies. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2347(020025), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0051654

 Google Scholar

Soon, W. L. (2019). A conceptual framework for innovation traits and acceptance of the adoption of blockchain in the stockbroking industry. BERJAYA Journal of Services & Management, 12, 15–19.

 Google Scholar

Kuberkar, S., & Singhal, T. K. (2021). Factors influencing the adoption intention of blockchain and internet-of-things technologies for sustainable blood bank management. International Journal of Healthcare Information Systems and Informatics, 16(4), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJHISI.20211001.oa15

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Bhardwaj, R., Sharma, A., Ghosh, S., Mani, N., & Kumar, K. (2021). Determinants of blockchain technology adoption in supply chains by small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in India. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2021, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/5537395

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Gao, S., & Li, Y. (2021). An empirical study in the adoption of blockchain-based games from users’ perspective. The Electronic Library, 39(4), 596–614. https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-01-2021-0009

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Chengyue, Y., Prabhu, M., Goli, M., & Sahu, A. K. (2021). Factors affecting the adoption of blockchain technology in the complex industrial systems: Data modelling. Complexity, 2021, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/8329487

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Knauer, F. O., & Mann, A. (2020). What is in it for me? Identifying drivers of blockchain acceptance among German consumers. The Journal of the British Blockchain Association, 3(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.31585/jbba-3-1-(1)2020

 Google Scholar

Sciarelli, M., Prisco, A., Gheith, M. H., & Muto, V. (2021). Factors affecting the adoption of blockchain technology in innovative Italian companies: An extended TAM approach. Journal of Strategy and Management, 15(3), 495–507. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSMA-02-2021-0054

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Abu Afifa, M. M., Van, H. V., & Van, T. L. H. (2022). Blockchain adoption in accounting by an extended UTAUT model: Empirical evidence from an emerging economy. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 21(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFRA-12-2021-0434

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Latif, I., & Zakaria, Z. (2020). Factors determine the behavioural intention in adopting the blockchain technology by Malaysian public sector officers. Journal of Advanced Research in Business and Management Studies, 20(1), 34–43. https://doi.org/10.37934/arbms.20.1.3443

 Google Scholar

Hira, F. A., Khalid, H., Abdul Rasid, S. Z., & Md Moshiul, A. (2022). Blockchain assessment framework for health professionals of Malaysian public hospitals. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Science, 12(5), 1–25.

 Google Scholar

Kapnissis, G., Vaggelas, G. K., Leligou, H. C., Panos, A., & Doumi, M. (2022). Blockchain adoption from the shipping industry: An empirical study. Maritime Transport Research, 3, 100058. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.martra.2022.100058

 Google Scholar

Nguyen, L.-T., Nguyen, D.-T., Khanh, N.-N., & Dang, T. V. D. (2023). Blockchain adoption in logistics companies in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. Cogent Business & Management, 10(2), 2216436–2216426. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2216436

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Khazaei, H. (2020). Integrating cognitive antecedents to UTAUT model to explain adoption of blockchain technology among Malaysian SMEs. International Journal of Informatics Visualization, 4(2), 85–90.

 Google Scholar

Wamba, S. F., & Queiroz, M. M. (2019). The role of social influence in blockchain adoption: The Brazilian supply chain case. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 52(13), 1715–1720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2019.11.448

 Google Scholar

Queiroz, M. M., Wamba, S. F., De Bourmont, M., & Telles, R. (2020). Blockchain adoption in operations and supply chain management: Empirical evidence from an emerging economy. International Journal of Production Research, 59(20), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2020.1803511

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Wahab, S. N., Loo, Y. M., & Say, C. S. (2020). Antecedents of blockchain technology application among Malaysian warehouse industry. International Journal of Logistics Systems and Management, 37(3), 427–444. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJLSM.2020.111414

 Google Scholar

Nuryyev, G., Wang, Y.-P., Achyldurdyyeva, J., Jaw, B.-S., Yeh, Y.-S., Lin, H.-T., & Wu, L.-F. (2020). Blockchain technology adoption behavior and sustainability of the business in tourism and hospitality SMEs: An empirical study. Sustainability, 12(3), 1256. https://doi.org/10.3390/su1203125

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Agi, M. A. N., & Jha, A. K. (2022). Blockchain technology in the supply chain: An integrated theoretical perspective of organizational adoption. International Journal of Production Economics, 247(103458), 108458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2022.108458

 Google Scholar

Kulkarni, M., & Patil, K. (2020). Blockchain technology adoption for banking services-model based on technology-organization-environment theory. In 3rd International Conference on Innovative Computing and Communication (ICICC-2020) (pp. 1–11). SSRN - Elsevier.

 Google Scholar

Lei, T. (2022). Research on the influencing factors of user acceptance of blockchain application in government services under TOE framework. Highlights in Science, Engineering and Technology, 12, 74–82. https://doi.org/10.54097/hset.v12i.1408

 Google Scholar

Vu, N., Ghadge, A., & Bourlakis, M. (2022). Evidence-driven model for implementing blockchain in food supply chains. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 26(5), 568–588. https://doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2022.2115987

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Wong, L.-W., Tan, G. W.-H., Lee, V.-H., Ooi, K.-B., & Sohal, A. (2020). Unearthing the determinants of blockchain adoption in supply chain management. International Journal of Production Research, 58(7), 2100–2123. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2020.1730463

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Fernando, Y., Mohd Rozuar, N. H., & Mergeresa, F. (2021). The blockchain-enabled technology and carbon performance: Insights from early adopters. Technology in Society, 64, 101507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101507

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Orji, I. J., Kusi-Sarpong, S., Huang, S., & Vazquez-Brust, D. (2020). Evaluating the factors that influence blockchain adoption in the freight logistics industry. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 141, 102025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2020.102025

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Choi, D., Chung, C. Y., Seyha, T., & Young, J. (2020). Factors affecting organization’s resistance to the adoption of blockchain technology in supply networks. Sustainability, 12(21), 8882. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12218882

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Lu, L., Liang, C., Gu, D., Ma, Y., Xie, Y., & Zhao, S. (2021). What advantages of blockchain affect its adoption in the elderly care industry? A study based on the technology-organization-environment framework. Technology in Society, 67(101786), 101786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101786

 Google Scholar

Wong, L.-W., Leong, L.-Y., Hew, J.-J., Tan, G. W.-H., & Ooi, K.-B. (2019). Time to seize the digital evolution: Adoption of blockchain in operations and supply chain management among Malaysian SMEs. International Journal of Information Management, 52(2), 101997. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.08.005

 Google Scholar

Hader, M., El Mohamedi, A., & Abouabdellah, A. (2020). Understanding the determinants of blockchain technology adoption stages and supply chain performance using the technology-organization-environment framework. In 13th International Conference on Modeling, Optimization and Simulation (MOSIM), Morocco (pp. 1–12). HAL.

 Google Scholar

Dehghani, M., Kennedy, R. W., Mashatan, A., Rese, A., & Karavidas, A. (2022). High interest, low adoption. A mixed -method investigation into the factors influencing organizational adoption of blockchain technology. Journal of Business Research, 149, 393–411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.05.015

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Abu Rumman, A., & Al-Abbadi, L. (2023). Structural equation modeling for impact of Data Fabric Framework on business decision-making and risk management. Cogent Business & Management, 10(2), 2215060. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2215060

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hao, D. D. Q., Hoa, T. T., & Dung, N. H. (2020). Factors affecting customers’ acceptance of the adoption of blockchain technology at Dong A Commercial Joint Stock Bank, Hue Branch. Hue University Journal of Science: Economics and Development, 129(5A), 5–16. https://doi.org/10.26459/hueuni-jed.v129i5A.5728

 Google Scholar

Al-Faouri, A., Al-Bazaiah, S., Alnsour, M., Abuanzeh, A., & Alshurideh, M. (2023). The digital adoption of Blockchain technology in the project management information systems: A value creation mediation model. International Journal of Data and Network Science, 7(2), 847–856. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.ijdns.2023.1.004

 Google Scholar

Liang, T.-P., Kohli, R., Huang, H.-C., & Li, Z.-L. (2021). What drives the adoption of the blockchain technology? A fit-viability perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, 38(2), 314–337. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2021.1912915

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hira, F. A., Khalid, H., Abdul Rasid, S. Z., & Alam, M. M. (2021). A conceptual framework to investigate health professionals’ blockchain technology adoption readiness in Malaysia. Open International Journal of Informatics, 9(2), 58–66.

 Google Scholar

Çolak, H., & Kağnıcıoğlu, C. H. (2022). Acceptance of blockchain technology in supply chains: A model proposal. Operations and Supply Chain Management, 159(1), 17–26.

 Google Scholar

Hafide, O., Zenjali, Y., & Lafraxo, Y. (2020). A conceptual analysis of factor that leads to blockchain technology adoption on a developing country context: Morocco. Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, 184, 211–217.

 Google Scholar

Jena, R. K. (2022). Examining the factors affecting the adoption of blockchain technology in banking sector: An extended UTAUT model. International Journal of Financial Studies, 10(4), 90. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijfs10040090

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Nguyen, H.-B., & Nguyen, L.-T. (2021). Factors influence blockchain adoption in supply chain management among companies based on Ho Chi Minh City. Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, 198, 1–13.

 Google Scholar

Saurabh, S., & Dey, K. (2021). Blockchain technology adoption, architecture and sustainable agri-food supply chains. Journal of Cleaner Production, 284, 124731. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124731

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Ullah, N., Al-Rahmi, W. M., Alfarraj, O., Alalwan, N., Alzahrani, A. I., Ramayah, T., & Kumar, V. (2022). Hybridizing cost saving with trust for blockchain technology adoption by financial institutions. Telematics and Informatics Reports, 6, 100008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teler.2022.100008

 Google Scholar

Rejeb, A., Rejeb, K., Keogh, J. G. & Zailani, S. (2022). Adoption in the circular economy: A Fuzzy Delphi and best-worst approach. Sustainability, 14(3611), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063611

 Google Scholar

Elhidaoui, S., Benhida, K., El Fezazi, S., Kota, S., & Lamalem, A. (2022). Critical success factors of blockchain adoption in green supply chain management: Contribution through an interpretive structural model. Production & Manufacturing Research, 10(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/21693277.2021.1990155

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Rijanto, A. (2021). Business financing and blockchain technology adoption in agroindustry. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 12(2), 215–235. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTPM-03-2020-0065

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Pradana, I. G. M. T., Djatna, T., Hermadi, I., & Yuliasih, I. (2023). Blockchain-based traceability system for indonesian coffee digital business ecosystem. International Journal of Engineering, 36(5), 879–893. https://doi.org/10.5829/IJE.2023.36.05B.05

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Yadav, V. S., Singh, A. R., Raut, R. D., & Govindarajan, U. H. (2020). Blockchain technology adoption barriers in the Indian agricultural supply chain: An integrated approach. Resources, Conservation & Recycling, 161, 104877–104815. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.104877

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Eaganathan, U., Indrian, V. V., & Nathan, Y. (2019). Ideation framework of block chain adoption in Malaysian higher education. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1228(1), 012072. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1228/1/012072

 Google Scholar

Ullah, N., Alnumay, W. S., Al-Rahmi, W. M., Alzahrani, A. I., & Al-Samarraie, H. (2020). Modeling cost saving and innovativeness for blockchain technology adoption by energy management. Energies, 13(18), 4783. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13184783

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Burger, C., & Weinmann, J. (2022). Blockchain platforms in energy markets – A critical assessment. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 15(11), 516. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm15110516

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Aketch, S., Mwambia, F., & Baimwera, B. (2021). Effects of blockchain technology on performance of financial markets in Kenya. International Journal of Finance and Accounting, 6(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.47604/ijfa.1237

 Google Scholar

Onyekwere, E., Ogwueleka, F. N., & Irhebhude, M. E. (2023). Adoption and sustainability of bitcoin and the blockchain technology in Nigeria. International Journal of Information Technology, 2023, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41870-023-01336-1

 Google Scholar

Mishra, R., Singh, R. K., Kumar, S., Mangla, S. K., & Kumar, V. (2023). Critical success factors of blockchain technology adoption for sustainable and resilient operations in the banking industry during an uncertain business environment. Electronic Commerce Research, 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-023-09707-3

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Gurnani, B., Kaur, K., & Morya, A. K. (2023). Adoption, implementation, definitions, and future of blockchain technology in ophthalmology. Indian Journal of Ophthalmology, 71(3), 1025–1026. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijo.IJO_1802_22

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Sanda, O., Pavlidis, M., & Polatidis, N. (2022). Regulatory readiness assessment framework for blockchain adoption in healthcare. Digital, 2(1), 65–87. https://doi.org/10.3390/digital2010005

 Google Scholar

Balasubramanian, S., Shukla, V., Sethi, J. S., Islam, N., & Saloum, R. (2020). A readiness assessment framework for blockchain adoption: A healthcare case study. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 165(120536), 120536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120536

 Google Scholar

Sharma, M., & Joshi, S. (2020). Barriers to blockchain adoption in health-care industry: An Indian perspective. Journal of Global Operations and Strategic Sourcing, 14(1), 134–169. https://doi.org/10.1108/JGOSS-06-2020-0026

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Lim, W. J., & Kamaruddin, N. K. (2023). A foresight study on adoption of blockchain technology among logistics industry. Research in Management of Technology and Business, 4(1), 282–297.

 Google Scholar

Balci, G., & Surucu-Balci, E. (2021). Blockchain adoption in the maritime supply chain: Examining barriers and salient stakeholders in containerized international trade. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 156, 102539–102517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2021.102539

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Aslam, J., Saleem, A., Khan, N. T., & Yun, B. K. (2021). Factors influencing blockchain adoption in supply chain management practices: A study based on the oil industry. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 6(2), 124–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2021.01.002

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Jardim, L., Pranto, S., Ruivo, P., & Oliveira, T. (2021). What are the main drivers of blockchain adoption within supply chain? An exploratory research. Procedia Computer Science, 181, 495–502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2021.01.195

 Google Scholar

Bag, S., Viktorovich, D. A., Sahu, A. K., & Sahu, A. K. (2021). Barriers to adoption of blockchain technology in green supply chain management. Journal of Global Operations and Strategic Sourcing, 14(1), 104–133. https://doi.org/10.1108/JGOSS-06-2020-0027

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar