ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2025
I-ETL: an interoperability-aware health (meta)data pipeline to enable federated analyses.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinicians are interested in better understanding complex diseases, such as cancer or rare diseases, so they need to produce and exchange data to mutualize sources and join forces. To do so and ensure privacy, a natural way consists in using a decentralized architecture and Federated Learning algorithms. This ensures that data stays in the organization in which it has been collected, but requires data to be collected in similar settings and similar models. In practice, this is often not the case because healthcare institutions work individually with different representations and raw data; they do not have means to normalize their data, and even less to do so across centers. For instance, clinicians have at hand phenotypic, clinical, imaging and genomic data (each individually collected) and want to better understand some diseases by analyzing them together. This example highlights the needs and challenges for a cooperative use of this wealth of information.
methodsWe designed and implemented a framework, named I-ETL, for integrating highly heterogeneous healthcare datasets of hospitals in interoperable databases. Our proposal is twofold: ([Formula: see text]) we devise two general and extensible conceptual models for modeling both data and metadata and ([Formula: see text]) we propose an Extract-Transform-Load (ETL) pipeline ensuring and assessing interoperability from the start.
resultsBy conducting experiments on open-source datasets, we show that I-ETL succeeds in representing various health datasets in a unified way thanks to our two general conceptual models. Next, we demonstrate the importance of blending interoperability as a first-class citizen in integration pipelines, ensuring possible collaboration between different centers.
conclusionAs a framework, I-ETL contributes to integrate and improve interoperability between healthcare institutions. When used in a decentralized federated platform, it eases the federated analysis of the different hospital databases and helps clinicians to obtain insights and knowledge on medical conditions of interest.
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.