Blockchain & FHIR: A Roadmap for Health Interoperability in Sub-Saharan Africa

I. The Imperative for Connected Health Systems in Sub-Saharan Africa

The advancement of digital health in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) is critically hampered by pervasive systemic fragmentation, which undermines patient care, public health security, and equitable access to services. To leverage innovative technologies such as Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT), policymakers must first establish the scope of the structural challenges inherent in the current healthcare ecosystem.

A. The Acute Crisis of Digital Fragmentation and Health Inequity

Healthcare systems across SSA are plagued by widespread data silos and inefficiencies. Many existing digital health solutions are characterized as fragmented, “inefficient vertical silos systems” that were often constructed with minimal involvement from the end-users they serve.¹ These solutions frequently lack the necessary mechanisms to capture high-fidelity, real-time data essential for responding effectively to immediate public health needs.¹

This fragmentation results in tangible and severe consequences for operational integrity and patient safety. Surveys indicate that an overwhelming majority of stakeholders (90.3%) report experiencing delays in system integration and compatibility issues.² Furthermore, two-thirds of respondents (66.0%) cite significant challenges in sharing information between systems, contributing to severe data redundancy and inconsistencies (61.1%).² Critically, this fragmentation also compounds security challenges, with 70.8% of respondents highlighting increased security and privacy risks due to system misalignment.² The systemic failure to achieve seamless data exchange exacerbates SSA’s significant disease burden and deep-rooted socioeconomic inequalities, thereby contributing to high rates of morbidity and mortality across the region.³

B. Financial Constraints and the Challenge of Sustainable Digitalization

Digital transformation efforts must be contextualized within the region’s profound financial constraints. Health expenditure in SSA remains critically low. In 2021, the per capita spending on health was only $92, which is approximately one-fifth of the $379 spent per person in the next lowest geographic region (North Africa and the Middle East).⁵ This figure falls substantially below the World Health Organization’s recommended per-capita spending necessary for robust health systems.⁶

Exacerbating the low expenditure is the stagnant prioritization of health spending within national budgets. The percentage of overall government spending dedicated to health in SSA averages 7.2%, and this is projected to remain low compared to the global average of 12.4%.⁵ While development assistance for health (donor funds) may climb, projections indicate it is not expected to keep pace with the growing economies in SSA.⁵ Furthermore, the rapid scaling of digital health, often fueled by external financing and innovative technological promises, is contributing to increased commercialization.⁷ This unregulated involvement of commercial actors operates within a “governance vacuum” and risks distorting already fragile public health systems, which is a significant structural problem inherent in the digitalization agenda.⁷

C. The Foundational Interoperability Paradox: FHIR Adoption vs. Functional Failure

A key paradox emerges when reviewing the reported adoption of interoperability standards against the operational challenges faced by healthcare facilities. Data suggests high self-reported adoption of international standards; for example, 71.5% of public hospitals report adopting the HL7 Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) standard, with high adoption rates also reported for older standards like HL7 CDA (65.3%) and HL7 versions 2 and 3.² The use of HL7 FHIR for standards-based data exchange is confirmed in eHealth strategies across multiple nations, including Ethiopia, Kenya, Malawi, and South Africa.⁸

However, if hospitals report such high adoption of FHIR—a standard designed to improve data exchange compatibility ⁹—it is incongruous that an overwhelming majority (90.3%) still report delays in system integration and 66% cite fundamental challenges sharing data.² This disconnect indicates that the challenge is not merely the absence of technical standards, but a profound lack of capacity, governance, and collaboration necessary to implement, maintain, and enforce those standards effectively.¹ Technical standards like FHIR provide the necessary syntax and semantics for health data exchange ⁹, but they cannot, by themselves, resolve the deep-seated issues of trust, fragmented governance, and lack of stakeholder collaboration cited as critical barriers (33.3% of respondents).² This structural failure signals the need for a solution that provides an enforced, trustworthy layer of governance, a niche where Distributed Ledger Technology is uniquely positioned to intervene.

II. Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) and the Paradigm Shift

Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT), specifically blockchain, offers structural benefits that directly address the transparency and trust deficits inherent in SSA health systems, moving beyond the capabilities of conventional centralized or federated data models.

A. DLT’s Unique Value Proposition for Trust and Integrity

DLT establishes a decentralized system of recording data and performing transactions, utilizing cryptography to ensure immutability and transparency.⁴ This structure provides substantial advantages in terms of security and integrity, particularly in environments marked by low institutional trust. DLT’s decentralized nature prevents system failure arising from any single point of transaction and ensures that data integrity is maintained through an immutable record.⁴

This transparent framework is already being leveraged to address critical supply chain vulnerabilities. The security and immutability provided by DLT are crucial in mitigating risks such as counterfeit medicines, a severe problem in SSA. For instance, VeChain in South Africa utilizes blockchain to verify the authenticity of pharmaceutical products, providing an immutable record throughout the production and distribution process.¹¹ Similarly, IBM is piloting blockchain projects in Nigeria aimed at tracking vaccine and medicine supply chains to ensure transparency and reduce the proliferation of counterfeit risks.¹²

Furthermore, DLT has the potential to significantly strengthen regional disease surveillance systems.⁴ Given the high mobility of people, animals, and goods across African borders ¹³, effective regional coordination is essential for early warning and response to infectious disease outbreaks.¹⁴ Blockchain offers a verifiable, rapid mechanism for sharing outbreak-related data across jurisdictions, facilitating timely decision-making and enhanced health security.⁴

B. Achieving Data Sovereignty through Self-Sovereign Identity (SSI)

One of the most profound benefits DLT offers in resource-constrained, governance-challenged settings is the ability to shift control of sensitive information from institutions to individuals, enabling a patient-centric model of care.¹⁵ This is embodied by the concept of the Self-Sovereign Patient.

By prioritizing individual control, DLT fundamentally enhances data sovereignty, mitigating the risks associated with centralized data management and significantly reducing the likelihood of data breaches or unauthorized access.¹⁶ Self-Sovereign Identity (SSI), built on decentralized, incorruptible ledgers ¹⁷, empowers individuals to manage and selectively disclose their own digital identity attributes autonomously, without reliance on centralized intermediaries.¹⁸

In SSA, where centralized state capacity for enforcement may be weak ¹ and commercial actors are increasingly gaining control over digital health data ⁷, granting patients direct, verifiable control over their own health records is not just a technical upgrade but a crucial tool for equity. This empowerment transforms data from an institutional commodity into a resource controlled by the patient, offering a pathway to reduce socioeconomic disparities in healthcare delivery and enhance individual autonomy.³ However, policy must anticipate and address the inherent conflict between DLT’s immutability and evolving regulatory rights, such as the right to data erasure required by modern privacy frameworks.¹⁵

C. Existing DLT Initiatives in SSA: Case Studies and Early Outcomes

DLT implementation is already underway across SSA, demonstrating proof-of-concept in several critical areas:

1. Medical Record Management: Companies like MediLedger in South Africa and Medici Land Governance in Zambia utilize blockchain solutions to securely manage medical records and store patient data, thereby enhancing the quality of healthcare service delivery.¹¹
2. Financial Inclusion and Access: In Kenya, the M-TIBA platform has integrated blockchain technology to facilitate access to healthcare services and manage payments via mobile phones.¹⁹ In Uganda, AID:Tech employs blockchain within refugee camps to improve healthcare access and ensure transparent distribution of medical aid.¹²
3. Pharmaceutical Transparency: Beyond supply chain tracking (IBM, Nigeria), specialized solutions like VeChain in South Africa provide authentication services to verify pharmaceutical products, directly supporting improved patient safety by combating counterfeit drugs.¹¹

These examples indicate that DLT is moving beyond theoretical discussion toward practical deployment that directly addresses local challenges related to access, transparency, and data management.

III. Comparative Analysis of Interoperability Models and Total Cost of Ownership (TCO)

A successful regional digital health strategy requires a rigorous comparative evaluation of technical architectures and a realistic assessment of financial sustainability in low-resource contexts.

A. DLT vs. Federated FHIR-Based Architectures

Modern interoperability models generally rely on either a centralized approach (traditional EHRs/cloud), a federated approach (standards-based exchange networks), or a distributed approach (DLT).

The Federated Model and Regional Alignment

The contemporary standard for semantic and structural health data exchange is Health Level Seven (HL7) FHIR.⁹ FHIR serves as the foundational language for large-scale regional initiatives, including the WHO’s Global Digital Health Certification Network (GDHCN).²⁰ The GDHCN, built on open-source digital public infrastructure and utilizing FHIR specifications, is designed to facilitate the secure and reliable cross-border verification of nationally approved digital health certificates.²⁰ This initiative, which includes an €8 million grant from the EU to bolster digital transformation in SSA, represents the established trajectory for regional collaboration and pandemic preparedness.²² The GDHCN is critical because it offers an “interoperable trust architecture” for verification while explicitly ensuring that the WHO does not access the underlying personal data, which remains the domain of the participating countries.²⁰

The DLT Model as a Trust Anchor

Distributed Ledger Technology, while complex, offers core advantages over centralized systems in SSA, often appearing as a “far better option” compared to the high cost and lack of security often associated with proprietary cloud computing.²³ DLT provides the immutable, verifiable, and transparent mechanism necessary to enforce data governance across disparate, historically siloed systems.¹⁰

The Hybrid Model Mandate

For SSA, the most pragmatic and sustainable solution is not DLT versus FHIR, but DLT integrated with FHIR. FHIR excels at defining the what and how of data structure and semantic exchange ⁹, while DLT excels at defining the who and when of access and provenance.¹⁰ A strategic hybrid system would utilize DLT as the uncorruptible trust layer—managing the immutable record of patient consent, access permissions, and verifiable credentials (SSI)—while using FHIR standards for the secure exchange of the actual health data payload.²⁴ This approach ensures that SSA systems comply with global interoperability standards (FHIR/GDHCN) while leveraging DLT’s inherent capabilities to solve the endemic problem of trust and fractured governance capacity.

Table 1: Strategic Comparison of Health Data Exchange Models in SSA

Feature	Centralized (Legacy/EHR)	Federated (FHIR/WHO GDHCN)	Distributed (DLT/Blockchain)
Primary Advantage	Simplicity, vendor support.	Standards-based modernization, regional scale.	Trustless security, immutable record, SSI.
Data Control & Sovereignty	Institutional/Vendor-centric.	Shared control via agreed-upon standards.	Individual (Patient-centric SSI).15
Security Risk	High Single Point of Failure.4	Relies on central trust infrastructure (Certificate Authorities).	Decentralized risk distribution.16
Initial Cost Burden	Moderate.	Moderate.	High (Due to infrastructure requirements).25
Infrastructure Reliance	High (Cloud/Datacenter).	Moderate (High-speed internet for APIs).	Extremely High (Reliable power/internet for node uptime).25
Interoperability Strategy	Siloed, inefficient.1	Semantic & structural harmonization.9	Trust layer for cross-system verification.10

B. Cost-Benefit and TCO Analysis in Low-Resource Settings

Financial feasibility is a primary determinant of DLT’s long-term sustainability. While DLT can offer advantages in security and flexibility compared to centralized cloud systems ²³, the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) in SSA is critically affected by infrastructure deficits.

Implementing complex technologies like AI and blockchain requires substantial resources across multiple domains.²⁶ This includes significant financial investment for advanced hardware, software, and ongoing maintenance. For public institutions and small enterprises, the financial cost burden associated with DLT pilot projects is often cited as prohibitive.²⁵ Furthermore, decentralized strategies, while providing greater local control, necessitate significant upfront investment and greater responsibility for infrastructure maintenance by the health entity itself.²⁶

The reliability of a DLT network, particularly its consensus mechanisms (like Byzantine Fault Tolerance models) ²⁷, is directly tied to the stability of underlying infrastructure. Unreliable electricity and internet connectivity, cited by over one-third of respondents as primary barriers ²⁵, introduce significant operational risk and increased costs. Maintaining consistent node uptime requires investment in complex backup power systems, which drives up the TCO. This suggests that while centralized cloud strategies pose privacy risks, they may offer a more practical, professionally maintained solution for large computational processes and scaling, often handling hardware maintenance and IT management tasks that resource-constrained local entities cannot reliably sustain.²⁶ Therefore, a holistic TCO analysis must balance the long-term benefits of decentralized trust against the immediate and pervasive costs of infrastructural instability.

IV. Addressing Implementation Barriers: Policy, Infrastructure, and Human Capital

The successful realization of DLT in SSA health systems depends on mitigating several acute, context-specific, non-technical barriers related to regulation, infrastructure, and human resources.

A. Policy and Regulatory Navigation: From Ambiguity to Governance

The foremost challenge in DLT adoption is the prevailing regulatory ambiguity, which severely deters investment and innovation.²⁵ The governance vacuum resulting from the rapid scale-up and unregulated involvement of commercial digital health actors further compromises the structural integrity of the public health system.⁷

This ambiguity is compounded by a deep-seated reluctance among health researchers in SSA to share data, despite acknowledging its scientific benefits. This discomfort stems from a lack of adequate governance processes, legal gaps (lacunae), and ethical concerns regarding confidentiality, informed consent, and the commercialization of research data.²⁸

The introduction of DLT necessitates the proactive development of legal frameworks that specifically address the technology’s unique characteristics. Policy must resolve the critical conflict between blockchain’s absolute immutability and modern data privacy requirements, such as the right to data erasure.¹⁵ A practical policy solution involves defining a secure hybrid architecture: the confidential health data itself must be stored off-chain (where it can be edited or erased), while the blockchain maintains only the immutable metadata, encrypted pointers, and verifiable records of consent and provenance. Policy must move beyond merely mapping existing regulations and actively shape DLT-specific governance, potentially requiring administrative acts or laws to empower new regulatory oversight bodies.²⁹

B. Overcoming Infrastructural and Operational Deficiencies

The operational stability of DLT is constrained by the persistent lack of robust physical infrastructure. As highlighted previously, over one-third of potential adopters cite unreliable internet and electricity as key barriers.²⁵ This infrastructural deficit directly undermines the core tenets of decentralized computing.

To address this, system design must prioritize resilience. Architectures must allow for the inherent unreliability of connectivity by implementing hybrid online/offline modes. For example, local controllers can store collected data and transmit it to the blockchain nodes only when connectivity is established, utilizing indexing to maintain a real-time overview of the network status and ensuring that the reliability of the blockchain algorithm is maintained across distributed copies of the ledger.³⁰ Furthermore, long-term sustainability hinges on dedicated, ongoing maintenance and support infrastructure. Without continuous technical investment, digital health technologies risk becoming obsolete or dysfunctional over time in low-resource settings.³¹

C. Human Capital Development and Capacity Building

The deployment of sophisticated technological solutions is currently bottlenecked by a severe human capital shortage in the health sector. Africa is home to 25% of the global disease burden but only 3% of the global healthcare workforce, struggling with a ratio of 1 doctor for every 3,000 patients.³² The region faces a projected shortage of 4.3 million doctors by 2035.³²

Implementing complex DLT and AI systems demands specialized expertise, including data scientists, blockchain developers, and IT experts.²⁶ There is an existing deficit in staff competency, with many reporting a lack of adequate knowledge and insufficient regular training on interoperability standards.² Consequently, strategic investment in education is paramount. Training programs must be established to cover health informatics fundamentals, digital infrastructure design for health information exchange, and digital health leadership skills, necessary for sustainable scale-up in low- and middle-income country settings.³³ Crucially, for long-term sustainability, digital health projects must prioritize building local capacity and ownership during the initial development phases, ensuring local teams are fully equipped to maintain and evolve the systems.³⁵

V. Strategic Roadmap and Policy Recommendations: A Hybrid Trust Framework

The expert assessment dictates a strategic roadmap that integrates DLT into established regional digital health initiatives, prioritizing institutional governance and human capital investment.

A. Phased Adoption and Regulatory Sandboxes

To move DLT from isolated pilot projects to scalable, regulated national systems, a phased approach focused on controlled testing environments is necessary.

1. Mandate Regulatory Sandboxes: Governments and regional bodies must establish dedicated regulatory sandboxes for digital health and DLT.²⁹ These sandboxes provide a structured environment for regulators and DLT innovators to communicate, share expertise, and safely test applications under flexible regulatory waivers.²⁹ This is the necessary mechanism to transform regulatory ambiguity into clear, evidence-based legal frameworks.²⁵
2. Informing Legal Frameworks: The sandbox phase must include comprehensive regulatory mapping, engaging government sectors outside of the Ministry of Health (such as data protection agencies) to identify all applicable laws.²⁹ The goal is to gather real-life evidence that will guide the creation of DLT-specific legislation, ensuring new products comply with security and privacy requirements before widespread adoption.

B. The Hybrid Interoperability Framework: DLT as the Trust Anchor

The technical strategy must be harmonization, leveraging the strengths of global standards while overlaying DLT for trust and sovereignty.

1. Leverage WHO GDHCN and FHIR: SSA nations must align their digital transformation efforts with the WHO Global Digital Health Certification Network (GDHCN).²⁰ The GDHCN, supported by the EU-WHO agreement ²², provides the existing framework and FHIR specifications necessary for establishing cross-border verification of health credentials (e.g., digitized Yellow Cards) and promoting continuity of care.²¹
2. Integrate DLT for SSI and Consent: DLT should be deployed as the indispensable trust layer within this framework. Blockchain manages the verifiable, immutable SSI credentials and consent records, ensuring that access to the actual health data—which remains stored off-chain using FHIR standards—is fully patient-controlled and verifiable.¹⁵ This hybrid model resolves the capacity-governance gap that plagues fragmented FHIR implementations.
3. Strengthen Regional Surveillance: The hybrid DLT framework directly supports Africa CDC’s strategic objectives to strengthen cross-border disease surveillance systems.¹⁴ By utilizing a verifiable ledger, DLT can enhance the tracking and reporting of laboratory capacity and diagnostic data for epidemic-prone diseases, currently a poorly understood area.³⁷

C. Human Capital and Institutional Strengthening

Long-term success relies entirely on addressing the human capital deficit and fostering local ownership.

1. Establish Regional Centers of Excellence: Support the creation of regional training programs, potentially through university or specialized institution consortia, that focus on core digital health competencies, including health informatics, digital infrastructure design, and the application of DLT technologies.³³
2. Prioritize Local Ownership and Capacity Building: All digital health programs must be designed in partnership with stakeholders from inception.³⁵ This includes robust, planned capacity building initiatives to ensure that local teams gain sufficient knowledge and skills to take technical and managerial ownership following initial development stages, a prerequisite for sustainable intervention in low-resource settings.³⁵

D. Sustainable Financing and Cost Mitigation

Given the economic realities of SSA health systems, innovative financing and cost control mechanisms are vital for DLT scale-up.

1. Shared Funding Models: Policy must promote shared funding partnerships designed to keep costs low for end-users, potentially zero, while rigorously monitoring hidden or unintended costs throughout the project duration.³⁵
2. Prioritize Open-Source DLT: To mitigate the financial burden that specialized pilot projects place on public institutions ²⁵, adopting open-source DLT frameworks should be prioritized. This reduces licensing costs, fosters regional developer independence, and lowers the barrier to entry for local innovation.
3. Focus on Cost-Reducing Applications: Priority should be given to DLT applications that yield measurable returns on investment by reducing systemic costs. This includes applications that reduce the prevalence of costly counterfeit pharmaceuticals ¹¹ and those that streamline administrative processes such as insurance claims, billing management, and logistics.⁴

Table 2: Key Policy Recommendations for DLT Integration in SSA Health Systems

Pillar	Recommendation	Strategic Rationale	Relevant Citation
Governance & Policy	Establish national/regional Regulatory Sandboxes for DLT.	To safely test innovation, gather evidence, and mitigate regulatory ambiguity and legal lacunae.28	28
Technology Architecture	Mandate a Hybrid FHIR-DLT Model.	Leverage FHIR (GDHCN) for data standards and DLT/SSI for decentralized trust, consent management, and data sovereignty.20	20
Infrastructure	Implement Hybrid Online/Offline DLT Architectures.	To ensure network reliability and maintain consensus during intermittent power/internet outages, addressing the core infrastructural deficit.25	25
Human Capital	Integrate Digital Health/DLT Competencies into Curricula.	To address the critical shortage of skilled IT and health informatics staff necessary for maintenance and sustainable implementation.32	26
Financing	Adopt Open-Source Frameworks and Zero-User-Cost Models.	To ensure financial sustainability and lower the prohibitive cost burden for public institutions and small enterprises.25	25

VI. Conclusion: A Phased Path to Trustless Health Ecosystems

The integration of Distributed Ledger Technology holds immense potential for resolving the systemic fragmentation and trust deficits that have historically undermined health system interoperability in Sub-Saharan Africa. The analysis confirms that DLT’s most critical value proposition in this environment is not as a simple replacement for existing data exchange standards, but as a foundational trust and governance layer.

The high reported adoption of sophisticated data standards like FHIR, juxtaposed with widespread functional failure, demonstrates that technical language is insufficient without an immutable, verifiable mechanism to enforce provenance and access rights across non-collaborating stakeholders. DLT provides this missing trust layer, enabling a powerful paradigm shift toward patient-centric data control through Self-Sovereign Identity.

The path forward requires a pragmatic and hybrid approach: SSA nations must strategically integrate DLT/SSI capabilities with the globally aligned, standards-based framework offered by the WHO Global Digital Health Certification Network (built on FHIR). Success is contingent upon concurrent investment in structural stability. This demands proactive policy interventions, notably the establishment of regulatory sandboxes to generate evidence-based governance, coupled with mandatory capacity building and the adoption of resilient, hybrid DLT architectures designed to function effectively despite the region’s prevalent infrastructural and financial constraints. By adopting this strategic, multi-pillar framework, SSA can move toward building truly connected, secure, and equitable health ecosystems.

Works cited

1. Digitizing African Health Systems – Frontiers, accessed November 6, 2025, https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/digital-health/articles/10.3389/fdgth.2022.854339/epub
2. ‘A tough nut to crack’: inconsistent standards as roadblocks to data interoperability of health information systems in public hospitals in the Gauteng Province of South Africa – PubMed Central, accessed November 6, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12279051/
3. Role of digital health technologies in improving health financing and universal health coverage in Sub-Saharan Africa: a comprehensive narrative review – PMC – NIH, accessed November 6, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12122447/
4. Strengthening public health surveillance through blockchain technology – PMC, accessed November 6, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6779606/
5. Financing health in sub-Saharan Africa 1990– 2050: Donor dependence and expected domestic health spending | Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, accessed November 6, 2025, https://www.healthdata.org/research-analysis/library/financing-health-sub-saharan-africa-1990-2050-donor-dependence-and
6. Mapping Africa’s Healthcare Needs and Value Chains – Asoko Insight, accessed November 6, 2025, https://www.asokoinsight.com/content/market-insights/mapping-africa-s-healthcare-needs-and-value-chains
7. A socio-legal critique of the commercialization of digital health in Sub-Saharan Africa, accessed November 6, 2025, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01442872.2025.2451966
8. Health information exchange policy and standards for digital health systems in africa: A systematic review – PMC – PubMed Central, accessed November 6, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9931258/
9. FHIR vs. HL7: Key Differences Explained | Orangesoft, accessed November 6, 2025, https://orangesoft.co/blog/fhir-vs-hl7-key-differences
10. A review of distributed ledger technologies application in medical systems interoperability, accessed November 6, 2025, https://journals.must.ac.ke/index.php/AJSTSS/article/view/203/142
11. Harnessing Blockchain Technology for Efficient Healthcare Service Delivery – Health Tech Africa, accessed November 6, 2025, https://healthtechafrica.org/sites/default/files/resources/PB_Blockchain-FNL_DEC.pdf
12. Blockchain | Health Tech Africa, accessed November 6, 2025, https://healthtechafrica.org/technology/blockchain
13. Strengthening Cross- Border Surveillance and Information Sharing in Africa, accessed November 6, 2025, https://africacdc.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Strengthening-Cross-Border-Surveillance-and-Information-Sharing-in-Africa-_strategic-framework.pdf
14. Surveillance and Disease Intelligence – Africa CDC, accessed November 6, 2025, https://africacdc.org/programme/surveillance-disease-intelligence/
15. The Self-Sovereign Patient as a Cornerstone of Healthcare 4.0, accessed November 6, 2025, https://blockchainhealthcaretoday.com/index.php/journal/article/view/414/791
16. Blockchain-Based Decentralized Storage Systems for Sustainable Data Self-Sovereignty: A Comparative Study – MDPI, accessed November 6, 2025, https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/17/7671
17. 3 Stages of a Pan-African Identity Framework for Establishing Self-Sovereign Identity With Blockchain – Frontiers, accessed November 6, 2025, https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/blockchain/articles/10.3389/fbloc.2021.631640/full
18. Challenges of user data privacy in self-sovereign identity verifiable credentials for autonomous building access during the COVID-19 pandemic – Frontiers, accessed November 6, 2025, https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/blockchain/articles/10.3389/fbloc.2024.1374655/full
19. The Role of FinTech in Sustainable Healthcare Development in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Narrative Review – MDPI, accessed November 6, 2025, https://www.mdpi.com/2674-1032/2/3/25
20. Global Digital Health Certification Network FAQs – World Health Organization (WHO), accessed November 6, 2025, https://www.who.int/initiatives/global-digital-health-certification-network/global-digital-health-certification-network-faqs
21. Global Digital Health Certification Network – World Health Organization (WHO), accessed November 6, 2025, https://www.who.int/initiatives/global-digital-health-certification-network
22. WHO and the European Union launch collaboration to advance digitized health systems in sub-Saharan Africa, accessed November 6, 2025, https://www.who.int/news/item/14-10-2025-who-and-the-european-union-launch-collaboration-to-advance-digitized-health-systems-in-sub-saharan-africa
23. The benefits and challenges of blockchain in healthcare supply chain management in KSA: A systematic review – PubMed Central, accessed November 6, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12451330/
24. Blockchain-Powered Healthcare Systems: Enhancing Scalability and Security with Hybrid Deep Learning – PubMed Central, accessed November 6, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10537957/
25. (PDF) Blockchain Adoption Barriers in Developing Countries – ResearchGate, accessed November 6, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/396879910_Blockchain_Adoption_Barriers_in_Developing_Countries
26. Toward a New Era of Smart and Secure Healthcare Information Exchange Systems: Combining Blockchain and Artificial Intelligence – MDPI, accessed November 6, 2025, https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/14/19/8808
27. Leveraging blockchain technology for cost efficiency of renewable energy – Frontiers, accessed November 6, 2025, https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/energy-research/articles/10.3389/fenrg.2025.1640117/full
28. Data as scientific currency: Challenges experienced by researchers with sharing health data in sub-Saharan Africa – PMC – PubMed Central, accessed November 6, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11500889/
29. Regulatory Sandboxes for Digital Health – Documents & Reports – World Bank, accessed November 6, 2025, https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/099011825011040830/pdf/P175075-0c729174-1c7a-4f04-9bb2-4127f301c037.pdf
30. Transition towards a full self-sufficiency through PV systems integration for sub-Saharan Africa: a technical approach for a smart blockchain-based mini-grid | Renewable Energy and Environmental Sustainability, accessed November 6, 2025, https://www.rees-journal.org/articles/rees/full_html/2022/01/rees210040/rees210040.html
31. Digital Health Technologies in Low-Resource Settings: Opportunities and Limitations, accessed November 6, 2025, https://www.scitechnol.com/peer-review/digital-health-technologies-in-lowresource-settings-opportunities-and-limitations-BPO7.php?article_id=25530
32. Health care in Africa: Emerging technologies at play – Brookings Institution, accessed November 6, 2025, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/health-care-in-africa-emerging-technologies-at-play/
33. Global Digital Health Certificate Program | Johns Hopkins, accessed November 6, 2025, https://publichealth.jhu.edu/academics/global-digital-health-certificate-program
34. Sustainable Healthcare with Digital Health Data Competence | University of Oulu, accessed November 6, 2025, https://www.oulu.fi/en/projects/sustainable-healthcare-digital-health-data-competence
35. Factors influencing the sustainability of digital health interventions in low-resource settings: Lessons from five countries – PubMed Central, accessed November 6, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7696238/
36. EU and US Regulatory Sandboxes: Groundbreaking Tools for Fostering Innovation and Shaping Applicable Regulations – Jones Day, accessed November 6, 2025, https://www.jonesday.com/en/insights/2023/04/eu-and-us–sandboxes-are-groundbreaking-tools
37. Laboratory Systems and Network Capacities in Africa: Framework for GIS-Mapping, accessed November 6, 2025, https://africacdc.org/download/laboratory-systems-and-network-capacities-in-africa-framework-for-gis-mapping/