JMIR Medical Informatics
Clinical informatics, decision support for health professionals, electronic health records, and eHealth infrastructures.
Editor-in-Chief:
Arriel Benis, PhD, FIAHSI, SMIEEE, MACE, Adjunct Associate Professor in the Department of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, NC, USA
Impact Factor 5.0 More information about Impact Factor CiteScore 7.5 More information about CiteScore
Recent Articles

Electronic health records (EHRs) are central to patient-centered care. However, many current EHR systems do not represent, exchange, or reuse genomic findings in structured, interoperable, and clinically actionable forms. Instead, genomic results are often retained in static reports. This limits their use in routine clinical care and clinical decision support. It also restricts their future reinterpretation as scientific knowledge evolves, as well as their reuse for research within appropriate governance frameworks. To support precision and personalized medicine, we advocate that clinically relevant genomic findings should be represented within EHRs as structured, phenotype-linked, interoperable, and versioned data. Raw and intermediate genomic files, however, should remain in appropriately governed laboratory or genomics repositories. This viewpoint is intended for health policymakers, health informatics leaders, EHR developers, research and clinical genomics laboratories, and clinicians involved in implementing genomics into routine care. It is informed by selected published literature and relevant technical standards. It is also informed by operational experience at the Cyprus Institute of Neurology and Genetics and multidisciplinary discussions from the Gen2EHR Implementation Guidelines Workshop conducted within the Extended EHR@EU Data Space and European Health Data Space for Secondary Use @CY initiatives. We examine technical, organizational, clinical, ethical, legal, and governance challenges, including inconsistent reporting formats and unclear clinical responsibility. We propose a staged, workshop-informed implementation pathway for evaluation within the European Health Data Space. The pathway combines Health Level 7 Fast Health Interoperability Resources Genomics Reporting with complementary standards and terminologies. It also includes transitional dual PDF and structured Fast Health Interoperability Resources reporting, governance for access, version control, reinterpretation, and clinical responsibility, as well as multidisciplinary pilot validation in real diagnostic workflows. The clinical effectiveness and transferability of the proposed pathway across European health systems remain to be established.

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) aims to optimize clinical outcomes but is hindered by logistical delays and susceptibility to data errors. Integrating model-informed precision dosing with point-of-care testing, fortified by rule-based validation and alerts, forms a transformative clinical decision support system (CDSS) essential for securing this complex workflow.

No preview text available.

No preview text available.

Health AI investment is accelerating across the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), yet the region’s health AI research output has never been systematically quantified. National research capacity is a structural precondition for the safe local development and governance of clinical AI, but no scientometric baseline exists for the 6 GCC states.

The development of structured optical character recognition (OCR) systems for Korean medical documents is hindered by strict privacy regulations that limit access to real clinical data. Existing synthetic document frameworks are primarily designed for generic layouts and Western languages, and fail to capture the complex formatting, bilingual terminology, and hierarchical field semantics required for clinical OCR and document-understanding tasks in hospital environments.

Summary care records are digital technologies designed to support information sharing and care coordination across fragmented health and social care systems. However, adoption and use of these technologies can vary across diverse health and care settings, with users using workarounds and other strategies to meet their specific information needs. In Scotland, the Key Information Summary (KIS) has been in use for over 13 years, sharing key patient information from general practitioners (GPs) with other health and care providers for future care planning.

Clinicians spend a lot of time on electronic health record (EHR) documentation, often at the expense of direct patient interaction. Ambient listening technology uses AI to passively record and summarize clinical encounters. Although early studies are promising, there is limited evidence on system performance in complex, non-English settings.

Regulatory frameworks such as the Belmont Report, the Common Rule, and the Declaration of Helsinki require informed consent to ensure participants understand a study’s purpose and can make voluntary decisions about their involvement. Regulations, including the General Data Protection Regulation (Regulation [EU] 2016/679), further emphasize that consent must be freely given and revocable without disadvantage. Although informed consent forms (ICFs) are intended to be clear and accessible, they have become increasingly lengthy and complex. Large language models (LLMs) offer the potential to navigate and interpret this complexity and have shown promise in biomedical information extraction tasks. However, their susceptibility to hallucinations limits their reliability in high-stakes settings. Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) can mitigate such errors.


Clinical temporal relation extraction (CTRE) is essential for reconstructing patient timelines from unstructured electronic health records (EHRs). However, the linguistic complexity of clinical notes and the high cost of expert annotation impede the development of large-scale training corpora. While large language models (LLMs) have transformed general natural language processing, their application to CTRE remains underexplored.
Preprints Open for Peer Review
Open Peer Review Period:
-
Open Peer Review Period:
-







