State-of-the-Art Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR)–Based Data Model and Structure Implementations: Systematic Scoping Review
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Data models are crucial for clinical research as they enable researchers to fully use the vast amount of clinical data stored in medical systems. Standardized data and well-defined relationships between data points are necessary to guarantee semantic interoperability. Using the Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) standard for clinical data representation would be a practical methodology to enhance and accelerate interoperability and data availability for research. OBJECTIVE: This research aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the state-of-the-art and current landscape in FHIR-based data models and structures. In addition, we intend to identify and discuss the tools, resources, limitations, and other critical aspects mentioned in the selected research papers. METHODS: To ensure the extraction of reliable results, we followed the instructions of the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist. We analyzed the indexed articles in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, IEEE Xplore, the ACM Digital Library, and Google Scholar. After identifying, extracting, and assessing the quality and relevance of the articles, we synthesized the extracted data to identify common patterns, themes, and variations in the use of FHIR-based data models and structures across different studies. RESULTS: On the basis of the reviewed articles, we could identify 2 main themes: dynamic (pipeline-based) and static data models. The articles were also categorized into health care use cases, including chronic diseases, COVID-19 and infectious diseases, cancer research, acute or intensive care, random and general medical notes, and other conditions. Furthermore, we summarized the important or common tools and approaches of the selected papers. These items included FHIR-based tools and frameworks, machine learning approaches, and data storage and security. The most common resource was "Observation" followed by "Condition" and "Patient." The limitations and challenges of developing data models were categorized based on the issues of data integration, interoperability, standardization, performance, and scalability or generalizability. CONCLUSIONS: FHIR serves as a highly promising interoperability standard for developing real-world health care apps. The implementation of FHIR modeling for electronic health record data facilitates the integration, transmission, and analysis of data while also advancing translational research and phenotyping. Generally, FHIR-based exports of local data repositories improve data interoperability for systems and data warehouses across different settings. However, ongoing efforts to address existing limitations and challenges are essential for the successful implementation and integration of FHIR data models.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle