ArticleScientific data2024
Towards an Interoperability Landscape for a National Research Data Infrastructure for Personal Health Data.
Article in Scientific data, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Connecting biospecimens and data: a scoping review-informed conceptual framework for digital infrastructure in biobanking and genomic research in low- and middle-income countries.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Quantitative analysis of the comprehensiveness and granularity of biomedical terminology systems.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Design specifications for biomedical virtual twins in engineered adoptive cellular immunotherapies.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Review
- Toward a Domain-Overarching Metadata Schema for Making Health Research Studies FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable): Development of the NFDI4Health Metadata Schema.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- Semantic enrichment of Pomeranian health study data using LOINC and WHO-FIC terminology mapping principles.JAMIA open · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The German initiative "National Research Data Infrastructure for Personal Health Data" (NFDI4Health) focuses on research data management in health research. It aims to foster and develop harmonized informatics standards for public health, epidemiological studies, and clinical trials, facilitating access to relevant data and metadata standards. This publication lists syntactic and semantic data standards of potential use for NFDI4Health and beyond, based on interdisciplinary meetings and workshops, mappings of study questionnaires and the NFDI4Health metadata schema, and literature search. Included are 7 syntactic, 32 semantic and 9 combined syntactic and semantic standards. In addition, 101 ISO Standards from ISO/TC 215 Health Informatics and ISO/TC 276 Biotechnology could be identified as being potentially relevant. The work emphasizes the utilization of standards for epidemiological and health research data ensuring interoperability as well as the compatibility to NFDI4Health, its use cases, and to (inter-)national efforts within these sectors. The goal is to foster collaborative and inter-sectoral work in health research and initiate a debate around the potential of using common standards.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.