3 ms·
Currently the most common and advanced practice I've seen is the FHIR format (https://www.hl7.org/ https://www.hl7.org/). This is not your usual step-tracking a
by grenoire 6y ago
Currently the most common and advanced practice I've seen is the FHIR format (https://www.hl7.org/ https://www.hl7.org/). This is not your usual step-tracking app, it's a data exchange format for hospitals and clinics. I think that's what this release is about because I know that Google has been interested in the FHIR protocol specifically. Microsoft and other large corporations are also exploring FHIR and similar systems, it's not as dreadful as you might think.
It looks like the idea is to bring the real data sharing protocols to the patient level, which is going to be an interesting challenge for them.
The comments regarding traction etc. are all valid, there are many angles in the healthcare technology business. Google might be one of the few companies which can get the money and momentum in it. Whether that's desirable or not is for you to ponder.
- Angostura 6y agoFWIW FHIR is also the protocol that Apple Health uses to integrate with the NHS records system.
- reaperducer 6y agoThere's a massive world of health data out there beyond FHIR. If Google thinks it can do something useful with FIHR, then good for Google. But it will only solve a very small part of the healthcare data problem.
- throwaway3699 6y agoFWIW FHIR is already supported by Google Cloud: https://cloud.google.com/healthcare/docs/concepts/fhir https://cloud.google.com/healthcare/docs/concepts/fhir
- grenoire 6y agoThis is on the supplier end, not the patient end.
- jonwithoutanh 6y agoIt's not that simple. Epic provides a FHIR API but if you try and use it you'll see that they do not adhere to the spec at all. And each different EHR provider that I attempted to interface with through FHIR all had different, broken, implementations of the spec.