ReviewComputational and structural biotechnology journal2026
Deconstructing the Interoperability Stack: A Comparative Technical Analysis of HL7 v2, CDA, and the FHIR Resource Framework.
Review in Computational and structural biotechnology journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This structured scoping review aims to provide a technical comparison of the development of interoperability standards in healthcare, from the early electronic health record systems, HL7 v2, HL7 v3/Clinical Document Architecture, to Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR). The review considers architectural foundations, semantic models, interoperability mechanisms, and conformance approaches of these standards in a consistent comparative context. With the introduction of the event-driven message paradigm (based on segments and trigger events), HL7 v2 became widely adopted in healthcare institutions; yet, a lot of customization at the local level often resulted in semantic incompleteness over the various environments within the healthcare industry. This led to the development of model-driven and document-centric semantic architectures such as HL7 v3 and Clinical Document Architecture to facilitate greater interoperability, but with implementation complexity and architectural rigidity, these were not widely embraced. FHIR then built on the experience of previous generations of interoperability, including the introduction of light-weight resource-oriented architectures, the RESTful way of interacting with resources, the profiling mechanism, and the introduction of a computable implementation guide that fits with web-native healthcare ecosystems. In contrast to the previous reviews, which concentrated mostly on individual interoperability standards or implementation areas, this review comparatively synthesizes technical and semantic development of interoperability architectures and investigates the treatment of any shortcomings found in preexisting architectures by the following standards. The synthesis indicates that FHIR currently represents one of the most scalable and implementation-oriented foundations for contemporary healthcare interoperability and future digital health integration.
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.