ArticleJMIR medical informatics2026
Benchmarking Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources-Based Analytics: Quantitative Study of RESTful Server Queries and Big Data Engines.
Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundElectronic health records offer vast clinical data for health care research, but interoperability challenges often hinder comprehensive analysis. The Health Level Seven Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) standard addresses these challenges, although its nested and interconnected resource format can be complex for analytics. Several tools have emerged to facilitate analytical access, either by querying FHIR servers via representational state transfer (REST) APIs or encoding resources in relational formats. However, the performance implications of these methods remain largely unexplored.
objectiveThis study aimed to benchmark the performance characteristics of different FHIR-based analytical approaches comparing REST API queries against SQL- and Spark-based big data frameworks operating on FHIR-encoded data.
methodsWe benchmarked the FHIR-PYrate library, which interfaces with a FHIR server's REST API, against Pathling, a library built for analytics based on Apache Spark, and Trino, a general-purpose SQL query engine. We defined and implemented multiple queries in each engine using 3 common analytics scenarios-data aggregation, counting, and extraction. Execution times were measured across Synthea-generated datasets of increasing size.
resultsOn the largest dataset, containing 71,285,064 FHIR resources, Trino completed the aggregate query more than 12,000 times faster, and Pathling did so approximately 500 times faster than FHIR-PYrate. On average across all queries, Trino outperformed FHIR-PYrate, executing extraction queries 33 times faster and count queries 1.8 times faster. Pathling achieved a 2.6-time speedup for extraction queries, but FHIR-PYrate was approximately 13 times faster for count queries.
conclusionsWhile the REST-based FHIR search API is useful for standard queries and retrieving specific patient records and can outperform alternatives for some count queries, it generally lacks the performance and expressiveness needed for complex analytics. In contrast, alternative engines such as Trino and Pathling demonstrated substantial performance advantages for these scenarios.
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.