Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40956977›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2025

Clinical Trial Schedule of Activities Specification Using Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources Definitional Resources: Mixed Methods Study.

Andrew Richardson, Patrick Genyn

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Andrew Richardson *fhir4pharma, Hungerford, Berkshire, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9065-7943
Patrick Genyn *fhir4pharma, Doylestown, PA, United States.ORCID 0009-0003-3408-4994

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical research studies rely on schedules of activities (SoAs) to define what data must be collected and when. Traditionally presented in tabular form within study protocols, SoAs are critical for ensuring data quality, regulatory compliance, and correct study execution. Recent efforts, such as the Health Level 7 Vulcan SoA Implementation Guide, have introduced Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) as a standard for representing SoAs digitally. However, current approaches primarily handle simple schedules and do not adequately capture complex requirements such as conditional branching, repeat cycles, or unscheduled events-features essential for many study designs, particularly in oncology.

objectiveThis study aimed to extend SoA representation methods to address these limitations. Specific objectives were to (1) develop methods for defining multiple SoA paths within a single model, (2) specify conditional scheduling requirements, (3) design a human-readable syntax for study specifications, (4) reflect these requirements as FHIR definitional resources, and (5) test bidirectional conversion between graph-based SoA models and FHIR representations.

methodsBuilding on previous work, SoAs were modeled using directed graphs in which nodes represented interactions (eg, visits) or activities, and edges defined transitions. Attributes were added to capture timing, conditional rules, and repeatability. Graph-based models were translated into FHIR PlanDefinitions and related resources (ActivityDefinition, ResearchStudy, and ResearchSubject). Extensions to PlanDefinition were developed (soaTimePoint and soaTransition) to store graph-specific attributes. Proof-of-concept models were implemented and tested using Python, NetworkX, pandas, and FHIR Shorthand, with validation conducted through FHIR servers to ensure structural equivalence and information retention.

resultsThe graph-based approach successfully modeled multiple paths, unscheduled events, and conditional rules within a single SoA. Edge attributes such as transitionDelay and transitionRule enabled accurate timing calculations and runtime evaluation of permitted paths. Conditional scheduling was expressed using a parameterized syntax interpretable by logic engines. More than 25 study protocols of varying complexity were tested; all could be represented without information loss. The proposed FHIR extensions allowed PlanDefinition resources to fully capture SoA graphs rather than limited tabular forms. Round-trip testing confirmed that the graph models and FHIR resources could be converted without loss of fidelity. The approach also highlighted inconsistencies in some protocol specifications, suggesting its utility for protocol quality assurance.

conclusionsThis study demonstrates that graph-based modeling, combined with targeted FHIR PlanDefinition extensions, enables an accurate and comprehensive representation of clinical study SoAs, including complex scheduling features that are not supported by current standards. These methods improve interoperability, reduce reliance on manual interpretation, and provide a basis for the automated integration of study protocols with electronic health records. While further tooling (eg, FHIRPath and clinical quality language) is needed for operational deployment, this approach offers a more precise and extensible solution for digital protocol implementation.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicHealth Information InteroperabilityHumansclinical trialselectronic health recordsFast Healthcare Interoperability ResourcesFHIRgraph methodsHealth Level 7HL7interoperabilityschedule of activities

Identifiers

PMID40956977
PMCPMC12583939

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 OpenQuestion graph.