4.4 Article

Prototypical Clinical Trial Registry Based on Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR): Design and Implementation Study

期刊

JMIR MEDICAL INFORMATICS
卷 9, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

JMIR PUBLICATIONS, INC
DOI: 10.2196/20470

关键词

clinical trials; trials registry; health information interoperability; data sharing; HL7 FHIR

资金

  1. German Ministry for Education and Research (BMBF) [FKZ 01ZZ1801A/B/C/D/L/M]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates the use of HL7 FHIR as a standardized format for exchanging and storing clinical trial records, presenting an open-source central trial registry as a prototype. The results demonstrate that FHIR resources facilitate automated data exchange between trial centers and central study registries, establishing a harmonized view of study information from heterogeneous sources.
Background: Clinical trial registries increase transparency in medical research by making information and results of planned, ongoing, and completed studies publicly available. However, the registration of clinical trials remains a time-consuming manual task complicated by the fact that the same studies often need to be registered in different registries with different data entry requirements and interfaces. Objective: This study investigates how Health Level 7 (HL7) Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) may be used as a standardized format for exchanging and storing clinical trial records. Methods: We designed and prototypically implemented an open-source central trial registry containing records from university hospitals, which are automatically exported and updated by local study management systems. Results: We provided an architecture and implementation of a multisite clinical trials registry based on HL7 FHIR as a data storage and exchange format. Conclusions: The results show that FHIR resources establish a harmonized view of study information from heterogeneous sources by enabling automated data exchange between trial centers and central study registries.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据