ReviewDigital health
A rapid review on the application of common data models in healthcare: Recommendations for data governance and federated learning in artificial intelligence development.
Review in Digital health. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This rapid review was undertaken to summarize contemporary knowledge on the application of common data models (CDMs) for semantic data standardization in the field of healthcare and provide a set of recommendations to guide the development of a CDM. Methods: The review adapted the Cochrane methodological recommendations for rapid reviews, namely (1) topic refinement, (2) setting eligibility criteria, (3) searching, (4) study selection, (5) data extraction, and (6) synthesis. Results: A total of 69 studies were included in the analysis. The analysis resulted in three interconnected layers covering (1) the federated network, (2) the iterative application process of a CDM, and (3) the data management process of each partner. Conclusion: Development and implementation of CDMs is a collaborative and iterative process, highly affected by the boundaries set by the individual federated learning partners, and the nature of their data. Interdisciplinary collaboration in application of CDMs for federated learning and data governance of health data is mandatory, with a call to increase domain expert involvement in data management.
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.