Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35818340›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2022

HL7 FHIR-based tools and initiatives to support clinical research: a scoping review.

Stephany N Duda, Nan Kennedy, Douglas Conway, Alex C Cheng, Viet Nguyen, Teresa Zayas-Cabán, Paul A Harris

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. A standards-based approach to digital health research: implementing the people heart study.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Stephany N DudaVanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
Nan KennedyVanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
Douglas ConwayVanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
Alex C ChengVanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1787-691X
Viet NguyenStratametrics LLC, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
Teresa Zayas-CabánNational Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Paul A HarrisVanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.

Funding

NIH HHSU.S. National Library of Medicine 75N97019P00279Vanderbilt University Medical Center
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe HL7® fast healthcare interoperability resources (FHIR®) specification has emerged as the leading interoperability standard for the exchange of healthcare data. We conducted a scoping review to identify trends and gaps in the use of FHIR for clinical research. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe reviewed published literature, federally funded project databases, application websites, and other sources to discover FHIR-based papers, projects, and tools (collectively, "FHIR projects") available to support clinical research activities.

resultsOur search identified 203 different FHIR projects applicable to clinical research. Most were associated with preparations to conduct research, such as data mapping to and from FHIR formats (n = 66, 32.5%) and managing ontologies with FHIR (n = 30, 14.8%), or post-study data activities, such as sharing data using repositories or registries (n = 24, 11.8%), general research data sharing (n = 23, 11.3%), and management of genomic data (n = 21, 10.3%). With the exception of phenotyping (n = 19, 9.4%), fewer FHIR-based projects focused on needs within the clinical research process itself. DISCUSSION: Funding and usage of FHIR-enabled solutions for research are expanding, but most projects appear focused on establishing data pipelines and linking clinical systems such as electronic health records, patient-facing data systems, and registries, possibly due to the relative newness of FHIR and the incentives for FHIR integration in health information systems. Fewer FHIR projects were associated with research-only activities.

conclusionThe FHIR standard is becoming an essential component of the clinical research enterprise. To develop FHIR's full potential for clinical research, funding and operational stakeholders should address gaps in FHIR-based research tools and methods.

Indexed as

Health Information SystemsHealth Level SevenDelivery of Health CareElectronic Health RecordsHumansdata managementelectronic health recordsfast healthcare interoperability resources (FHIR)health information interoperabilityhealth information management

Identifiers

PMID35818340
PMCPMC9382376

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.