1) Pseudonymisation maturity
Can your organisation pseudonymise health data at the data-holder side? Which technical gaps exist?
The European Health Data Space (EHDS) sets concrete technical expectations for organisations that process or share health data. Synaptic Four assesses whether and how your existing infrastructure can meet those expectations—with four core pillars plus optional extension modules for secondary-use intake and MII/FDPG alignment.
Consulting, async-first, Clinics · Pharma · Research
For decision makers
For decision-makers in two minutes
Short plain-language context. GA4GH in one sentence. How inclusion fits us. The rest of this page keeps the full technical depth.
We map your IT landscape to four technical themes that show up in EHDS-related planning: pseudonymisation, dataset catalog readiness, controlled processing baseline, and interoperability. You can extend the scope with two optional modules: EHDS2 secondary use readiness (practical “data access request” intake) and MII/FDPG gap analysis against current MII KDS profiles. You receive a written report with prioritised engineering steps and a plain view of where Ferrum or BioResearch Assistant could help. Legal interpretation and compliance sign-off stay with you—we flag when specialist counsel may be useful.
What is GA4GH?
The Global Alliance for Genomics and Health (GA4GH) is an international initiative that defines shared technical interfaces for genomic data and analyses. Partners connect under clear contracts instead of rebuilding bespoke integrations for every link.
Synaptic Four combines rigorous engineering with an explicit, lived commitment to neurodiversity and autism inclusion. That is part of who we are—not an add-on to the tech story. More: About us Autism
The review maps your infrastructure to common GA4GH building blocks (e.g. DRS for discoverable datasets, WES/TES for controlled analysis, Beacon and htsget for controlled queries). What matters is the outcome: traceable data paths, credible partner interfaces, and clearer alignment between engineering and privacy governance—so EHDS and research discussions become actionable; still no legal or compliance guarantee from us.
EHDS is an evolving policy area: what applies to your organisation depends on applicable law, your role, and your contracts. We provide engineering and technical orientation. Legal assessment, formal compliance decisions, and DPO work remain with you and your professional advisors.
This page contains the full service description of the assessment (method, deliverables, boundaries).
A typical review runs 3–5 weeks depending on infrastructure complexity and your team’s availability. Typical budget for a mid-size institute: €4,000–8,000 net.
Multi-site or heterogeneous environments are quoted project-by-project after a free initial call.
You complete a structured questionnaire on your current infrastructure, data processes, and regulatory context. No call required—everything in writing.
Synaptic Four analyses your inputs and produces the report.
You receive the full report. Follow-up questions are answered in writing, or in an optional video call with a shared agenda.
Can your organisation pseudonymise health data at the data-holder side? Which technical gaps exist?
Can you generate a machine-readable HealthDCAT-AP-oriented dataset catalog? Do you maintain structured dataset metadata?
Is your stack suitable for controlled secondary-use processing (audit logging, isolation, workflow control)? Which components are missing?
Which interfaces are missing for exchange with research partners and national programs (e.g. FHIR, GA4GH DRS/WES, htsget)?
You can extend the baseline review with two add-on modules (separate scope and pricing)—including EHDS2 secondary use readiness and MII/FDPG alignment. They are grounded in our research and product work—still technical orientation only, not legal advice or an official compliance verdict.
Are your data ready for secondary use applications? We review: dataset catalog completeness, metadata format (DCAT-AP Health, MII KDS), an HDAB-compatible application pathway, and whether a Secure Processing Environment (SPE) is reachable or plannable.
Gap analysis of your FHIR implementation against the current MII core dataset (2025.x). Which modules matter for your use cases (molecular tumour board, genomics, pathology, biobanking)? What is missing for FDPG listing? A prioritised implementation plan.
Technical consulting only: our report is for engineering and planning. It does not replace lawyers, DPOs, or official procedures.
Further reading: EHDS - technical requirements in detail →
Pricing on request (depends on organisation size and scope). Optional modules are quoted separately.
Initial orientation at no charge.
After your message: a reply within two business days, then a free 30-minute intro call.
You can also contact us directly: contact@synapticfour.com
We respond within 2 business days.
Repositories, demos, and benchmarks are publicly inspectable; Ferrum and related artefacts are documented. This is not “trust us”—inspect the evidence.