{"id":58111,"date":"2026-09-24T13:38:34","date_gmt":"2026-09-24T13:38:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.bridge-global.com\/blog\/?p=58111"},"modified":"2026-09-26T12:43:57","modified_gmt":"2026-09-26T12:43:57","slug":"application-development-in-healthcare","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.bridge-global.com\/blog\/application-development-in-healthcare\/","title":{"rendered":"Application Development in Healthcare: A Complete Guide"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>You&#039;re probably at the point where the product looks real enough to sell, but the build still feels easier than the rules around it. A prototype for a clinic, hospital network, or payer-linked workflow can move fast in demos, then slow down the moment anyone asks about patient data, audit trails, or how the app will fit into a live care process. That gap is where application development in healthcare stops being a normal software project and becomes an operating discipline.<\/p>\n<p>The teams that do well usually learn the same lesson early. Clinical software is not just another app with more paperwork. It touches regulated data, real workflows, and decisions that affect care, which means architecture, validation, security, and interoperability all shape the product from day one.<\/p>\n<h2>Why Healthcare Software Is a Different Category<\/h2>\n<p>A small team often starts with a familiar playbook. They build a fitness tracker, a symptom checker, or a scheduling app, then a hospital buyer asks for SSO, portal access, audit logs, and EHR integration. That&#039;s the moment the project changes category.<\/p>\n<h3>The product isn&#039;t just software; it&#039;s part of a care system<\/h3>\n<p>In consumer software, a bad release might annoy users. In healthcare, a bad release can break a workflow, hide a result, or expose protected information. A patient record is not just a row in a database; it&#039;s a regulated artifact that may need access control, traceability, and careful handling across teams and vendors.<\/p>\n<p>That changes the rhythm of the work. Product managers can&#039;t treat compliance as a final review, because compliance choices affect how you model data, who can see what, and how you prove what happened later. Engineers can&#039;t assume they&#039;ll \u201cadd security\u201d after MVP, because the security model often determines the shape of the MVP itself.<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p><strong>Practical rule:<\/strong> if a feature would be unacceptable in a chart room, it usually needs a different design in the app too.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<h3>Consumer speed and clinical trust move at different paces<\/h3>\n<p>Consumer teams often optimize for launch velocity, quick A\/B tests, and loose iteration. Healthcare teams still care about speed, but they also care about liability, auditability, and whether a clinician can trust the software when the screen is busy and the stakes are real. Those concerns slow hiring, design approval, and release cycles.<\/p>\n<p>That&#039;s why founders underestimate the work. They budget for screens and APIs, then discover they also need consent logic, role definitions, event logs, fallback paths, and a chain of evidence for validation. The timeline stretches not because healthcare teams are slow, but because the software must be dependable in a way a normal consumer app doesn&#039;t have to be.<\/p>\n<p>The cleanest mindset shift is this. In healthcare, compliance, interoperability, and validation are not add-ons. They&#039;re foundation choices, and every later decision sits on top of them.<\/p>\n<h2>What Counts as a Healthcare Application<\/h2>\n<p>A healthcare application is any software that stores, processes, or transmits protected health information, influences clinical decisions, or plugs into clinical workflows. That can be a clinician dashboard, a patient portal, a telehealth tool, a care-coordination system, or even a quiet internal utility that helps staff move patient data faster. The label matters because it tells you how carefully you need to design security, access, and integration.<\/p>\n<h3>Start by asking what the software actually touches<\/h3>\n<p>If the product handles patient identity, lab results, prescriptions, notes, messages, or billing-linked clinical data, it&#039;s in healthcare territory. If it only tracks generic wellness habits with no connection to a covered entity, the exposure is different. The question is not whether the app feels \u201chealth-related\u201d; it&#039;s whether it sits inside a regulated workflow.<\/p>\n<p>The market has also moved toward integrated behavior. By 2024, 65% of U.S. individuals were offered and accessed their online medical record or patient portal, and among those who accessed records, 57% did so using an app in 2024, up from 38% in 2020 and 51% in 2022. That shift matters because patients now expect mobile access to core clinical information, not just reminders or wellness tracking.<\/p>\n<h3>Main categories you&#039;ll keep seeing<\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>\n<p><strong>EHR modules<\/strong>: These are used by clinical staff and are usually the most sensitive because they sit closest to the chart.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p><strong>Patient-facing apps<\/strong>: These include portals, messaging, appointment tools, and result viewers.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p><strong>Telehealth platforms<\/strong>: These move visits, intake, and follow-up into software.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p><strong>Clinical decision support<\/strong>: These surface prompts, rules, or insights to clinicians.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p><strong>Clinician productivity tools<\/strong>: These help staff document, triage, or coordinate care faster.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table><tr>\n<th>Category<\/th>\n<th>Primary User<\/th>\n<th>Data Sensitivity<\/th>\n<th>Regulatory Exposure<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>EHR modules<\/td>\n<td>Clinicians and staff<\/td>\n<td>Very high<\/td>\n<td>High<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Patient-facing apps<\/td>\n<td>Patients<\/td>\n<td>High<\/td>\n<td>High<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Telehealth platforms<\/td>\n<td>Patients and clinicians<\/td>\n<td>High<\/td>\n<td>High<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Clinical decision support<\/td>\n<td>Clinicians<\/td>\n<td>Very high<\/td>\n<td>High<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Clinician productivity tools<\/td>\n<td>Clinical staff<\/td>\n<td>High<\/td>\n<td>High<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n<p>The practical test is simple. If the software is part of the care journey, assume it&#039;s a healthcare application until proven otherwise. That assumption pushes the team to design for access control, auditability, and integration from the start.<\/p>\n<h2>HIPAA and GDPR as Engineering Constraints<\/h2>\n<p>Regulations get easier to handle when you stop reading them like legal riddles and start treating them like design constraints. Think of PHI like toxic material in a lab. You don&#039;t just store it; you contain it, label it, track it, and limit who can handle it.<\/p>\n<h3>HIPAA becomes concrete the moment you map it to the stack<\/h3>\n<p>The practical storage rule is straightforward. Production healthcare APIs should be protected with TLS, and F<a href=\"https:\/\/build.fhir.org\/security.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">HIR security guidance says<\/a> production exchange SHOULD be secured with TLS, while HIPAA-oriented engineering guidance commonly specifies TLS 1.2+, preferably 1.3, in transit and AES-256 at rest, with keys managed in a KMS or HSM. That is not a paperwork detail; it&#039;s a database, network, and key-management decision.<\/p>\n<p>The same logic applies to access control and logging. Role-based access limits what each user can see, and audit logs make it possible to reconstruct who touched which record and when. A safe design doesn&#039;t just keep data encrypted; it limits the blast radius if a token, backup, or log store is compromised.<\/p>\n<h3>GDPR changes product behavior, not just privacy pages<\/h3>\n<p>GDPR asks different questions, but the engineering impact is similar. You need a lawful basis for processing, data minimization, a way to support data subject rights, and a plan for cross-border transfers. If your app serves European users or partners, those requirements affect where data lives, how long you retain it, and which vendors can touch it.<\/p>\n<p>The easiest way to make the rules real is to push them into system design. Don&#039;t let analytics tools see raw identifiers unless you&#039;ve intentionally designed for that. Don&#039;t let logs contain free-text patient content if the log pipeline isn&#039;t built for sensitive data. Don&#039;t assume every cloud or SaaS vendor fits just because it&#039;s convenient.<\/p>\n<p>For teams looking for a practical implementation pattern, a <a href=\"https:\/\/guidinggrowth.app\/hipaa-compliant-app\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">secure behavioral tracking app for parents<\/a> can be a useful reference point for how sensitivity, consent, and access control are translated into product design. The exact solution will differ by use case, but the engineering principle stays the same.<\/p>\n<p>You can also see how vendor selection and compliance posture are handled in <a href=\"https:\/\/www.bridge-global.com\/blog\/hipaa-compliant-software-development\/\">this overview of HIPAA-compliant software development<\/a>. The useful takeaway isn&#039;t the legal label; it&#039;s the discipline of designing the system so the rules are part of the architecture.<\/p>\n<p><figure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/www.bridge-global.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/application-development-in-healthcare-security-compliance.jpg\" alt=\"A diagram illustrating HIPAA and GDPR compliance requirements including encryption, access control, and audit logging for healthcare.\" \/><\/figure>\n<\/p>\n<h2>Security Foundations for Healthcare Applications<\/h2>\n<p>Security needs to be in place before the first PHI byte lands in the system. If you wait until launch week, you&#039;ll end up patching identity, transport, storage, and logging under pressure, which is exactly when mistakes become expensive.<\/p>\n<h3>Identity and transport should be boring<\/h3>\n<p>Use SSO, MFA, and role-based access so the app knows who is inside and what they&#039;re allowed to do. Consumer app habits like shared service accounts, broad admin roles, and permanent tokens don&#039;t belong here. In healthcare, identity is not a convenience feature; it&#039;s a control surface.<\/p>\n<p>Transport security should be just as strict. Enforce TLS 1.2+ everywhere, and use certificate pinning on mobile where the threat model justifies it. If a device, clinic Wi-Fi, or proxy introduces risk, the app should still keep PHI protected in transit.<\/p>\n<h3>Storage and logs need separate thinking<\/h3>\n<p>Encrypt data at rest with managed keys, and treat the key store as part of the security boundary. Field-level encryption makes sense for especially sensitive values, because not every column deserves the same visibility. Audit logs should be tied to user identity and action, not just to IP addresses, because IPs alone don&#039;t tell you who accessed what.<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>A good healthcare log answers three questions fast: who touched the data, what they did, and whether that action was expected.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>Threat modeling should happen early, during design sprints, not as a pre-launch panic. Ask where PHI enters the system, where it moves, where it gets copied, and where it can leak through errors, retries, queues, or third-party services. Then build your release pipeline so static analysis, dependency scanning, and pen testing happen as part of normal delivery, not as a one-off audit scramble.<\/p>\n<h3>Common security defaults that fail in healthcare<\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>\n<p><strong>Shared admin access<\/strong>: This weakens accountability and renders audit trails ineffective.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p><strong>Overly broad roles<\/strong>: Staff see more patient data than they need.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p><strong>Tokens that never expire<\/strong>: Lost devices and stale sessions become harder to contain.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p><strong>Verbose error messages<\/strong>: Debug output can expose patient details or internal identifiers.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p><strong>Non-HIPAA vendor choices<\/strong>: A convenient tool can erode the compliance model.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>The goal isn&#039;t to make the app paranoid. It&#039;s to make the security baseline strong enough that the rest of the product can move without constant rework.<\/p>\n<p><figure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/www.bridge-global.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/application-development-in-healthcare-security-foundations.jpg\" alt=\"A diagram illustrating three key security foundations for healthcare applications: Identity Management, Transport Security, and Data Protection.\" \/><\/figure>\n<\/p>\n<h2>Interoperability and FHIR Beyond the Checklist<\/h2>\n<p>Interoperability is where a lot of healthcare projects lose time. Teams often talk about it as if it were a box to tick, but in practice it behaves like an architecture problem and a timeline problem at the same time.<\/p>\n<h3>FHIR is the contract, not the whole system<\/h3>\n<p>FHIR gives teams a resource model and API conventions that make healthcare data more portable. <a href=\"https:\/\/pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/articles\/PMC9555876\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">SMART on FHIR<\/a> adds OAuth2 and scoped access so third-party apps can connect safely to EHR contexts. FHIR has gained worldwide adoption, and in the U.S., patient-facing FHIR APIs are a federal requirement for EHR certification under the 21st Century Cures Act.<\/p>\n<p>That sounds clean on paper. In real builds, the hard part is not the API shape; it&#039;s the normalization layer that sits between messy source systems and usable clinical features. Local lab codes, internal department names, old identifiers, and vendor-specific quirks all need translation before the product can do anything reliable with them.<\/p>\n<h3>The hidden work is in mapping and cleaning<\/h3>\n<p>Teams usually underestimate three things. First, EHR integration often varies by vendor, even when both claim FHIR support. Second, wearables and device data can arrive in incompatible formats. Third, sandbox success doesn&#039;t mean production will be smooth, because the actual bottlenecks show up when the team has to move from \u201cconnected\u201d to \u201cusable.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>That&#039;s why \u201cjust connect the systems\u201d is misleading. In many projects, the greatest effort sits in building the layer that normalizes data and keeps downstream features from being polluted by inconsistency. If you skip that layer, every clinical feature becomes a separate integration exception.<\/p>\n<p>A simple architecture choice can save months later. Point-to-point integrations work for tiny scopes, but they get brittle fast. An API gateway plus a canonical store gives the team one place to standardize data before it fans out to analytics, workflows, or patient experiences.<\/p>\n<p>For a vendor-side view of the moving parts, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.bridge-global.com\/blog\/fhir-integration-services\/\">FHIR integration services<\/a> are most useful when they&#039;re treated as a systems problem, not a single endpoint project. That&#039;s the right lens for partner selection too.<\/p>\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table><tr>\n<th>EHR System<\/th>\n<th>FHIR Endpoint Maturity<\/th>\n<th>Typical Integration Effort<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Epic<\/td>\n<td>Often production-capable, but onboarding details matter<\/td>\n<td>Moderate to high<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Cerner<\/td>\n<td>Often production-capable, but mapping still takes work<\/td>\n<td>Moderate to high<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Meditech<\/td>\n<td>May rely more on bridge patterns in some environments<\/td>\n<td>Moderate to high<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n<p>The smart question is not whether an EHR says it supports FHIR. It&#039;s whether the production path, data mapping, and onboarding steps fit the product timeline you have.<\/p>\n<h2>AI and Machine Learning in Clinical Software<\/h2>\n<p>AI belongs in healthcare software when the problem needs pattern recognition, ranking, summarization, or prediction. It doesn&#039;t belong everywhere, and treating it like a universal upgrade usually creates more validation work than value.<\/p>\n<h3>Rules are cleaner when the logic is fixed<\/h3>\n<p>Rule-based logic is still the best fit for deterministic thresholds, eligibility checks, and guideline-driven alerts. Clinicians and auditors can inspect the logic, replay it, and understand why the software made a decision. That makes it easier to defend in regulated environments.<\/p>\n<p>Machine learning earns its place in triage, imaging support, documentation summarization, and risk prediction. Those tasks benefit from probability, not just if-then logic. The trade-off is that every learned model brings training-data provenance, version pinning, bias monitoring, and human review into the build.<\/p>\n<h3>AI changes what validation means<\/h3>\n<p>A regulated ML model is not just a feature. It&#039;s a software component plus a statistical artifact that changes over time, which collides with the traditional idea of freezing behavior between releases. That means change control has to track more than code; it has to track data, model versions, evaluation sets, and clinical oversight.<\/p>\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table><tr>\n<th>Aspect<\/th>\n<th>Rule-Based Logic<\/th>\n<th>Machine Learning<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Transparency<\/td>\n<td>High<\/td>\n<td>Lower<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Auditability<\/td>\n<td>Strong<\/td>\n<td>Requires extra documentation<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Clinical risk<\/td>\n<td>Easier to bound<\/td>\n<td>Harder to predict<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Update model<\/td>\n<td>Manual and explicit<\/td>\n<td>Data-dependent and versioned<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n<p>The right pattern is usually hybrid. Use rules for boundaries and safety checks, then let ML assist where uncertainty is useful and review is available. That keeps the software understandable even when the model is doing useful work in the background.<\/p>\n<h2>Testing Deployment and Validation in Regulated Environments<\/h2>\n<p>Healthcare releases need more ceremony than consumer launches, and for good reason. You&#8217;re not just proving that the code runs; you&#8217;re building evidence that the system behaved predictably under controlled conditions.<\/p>\n<h3>Validation starts before production<\/h3>\n<p>Every rule that touches PHI should have traceable unit and integration tests. If a workflow maps to an IEC 62304 or FDA-relevant concern, the test evidence and documentation should line up with the regulatory expectation for that class of software. Synthetic data belongs in non-production environments, because test environments should not become informal PHI sinks.<\/p>\n<p>Immutable audit trails matter during testing too. If a developer, tester, or clinician reviewer accesses data or changes a configuration, that event should be captured in a way that survives later review. Release teams often get surprised because the \u201ctemporary\u201d test setup becomes part of the compliance story.<\/p>\n<h3>CI\/CD still works, but the gates are stricter<\/h3>\n<p>Static analysis, dependency scanning, signed builds, and promotion gates should all be part of the pipeline from the start. Rollbacks need to be planned, not improvised. Feature flags and cohort-based rollout are especially useful inside provider organizations, because they let teams expose a feature to a limited group before broad activation.<\/p>\n<p>The documentation package matters as much as the code. QA, clinical reviewers, and compliance stakeholders should all sign off on the release, because each group sees a different risk. If you need a practical reference for quality gates in regulated software delivery, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.bridge-global.com\/blog\/medical-software-quality-assurance-guide\/\">this medical software quality assurance guide<\/a> is a useful starting point.<\/p>\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/www.bridge-global.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/application-development-in-healthcare-regulatory-compliance.jpg\" alt=\"A three-step infographic illustrating the process of testing, validation documentation, and deployment approval in regulated healthcare software environments.\" \/><\/figure>\n<h2>A Practical Playbook for Founders and Providers<\/h2>\n<p>The fastest way to waste time is to pick technology before you&#8217;ve defined the clinical problem and the regulatory class. Those two answers decide almost everything else, from data design to vendor selection to how much validation you&#8217;ll need later.<\/p>\n<h3>Sequence the build in the right order<\/h3>\n<p>Start with discovery, not features. Identify the clinical workflow, the user, the data touched, and the risk if the app fails. Then design compliance and FHIR strategy together, because one shapes the other in ways that often exceed typical expectations.<\/p>\n<p>Prototype with synthetic data first, then validate with clinicians, then harden security, then plan a staged rollout. This order keeps the team from discovering, too late, that a seemingly simple feature is blocked by identity, data mapping, or a missing integration path. It also keeps the product from becoming dependent on a vendor or architecture choice that can&#8217;t scale.<\/p>\n<h3>Common traps worth avoiding<\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>\n<p><strong>Treating HIPAA as a legal afterthought:<\/strong> That usually creates rewrites in data flows and logging.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p><strong>Choosing the EHR partner too late:<\/strong> Integration constraints can shape the roadmap earlier than expected.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p><strong>Underbudgeting for validation:<\/strong> Ongoing testing, change control, and post-market surveillance are not one-time tasks.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p><strong>Overbuilding before clinical fit is proven:<\/strong> A polished feature that misses the workflow still fails.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>One practical option for teams that want a delivery partner with healthcare software experience is Bridge Global, which works on compliant health tech, custom software, QA, cloud enablement, and integration-heavy builds. The important point is not the vendor name; it&#8217;s the fit between the delivery team and the regulatory, clinical, and interoperability load of the project.<\/p>\n<h3>Week-one checklist for founders and providers<\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>\n<p><strong>Clarify the clinical problem:<\/strong> Write down the exact workflow and who will use the product.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p><strong>Classify the software early:<\/strong> Decide whether PHI, clinical decision support, or EHR integration is involved.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p><strong>Map the data path:<\/strong> Identify where information enters, moves, and gets stored.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p><strong>Set the security baseline:<\/strong> Lock identity, transport, storage, and logging decisions before prototype work starts.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p><strong>Pick the integration approach:<\/strong> Decide whether you need direct EHR connections, FHIR, or a normalization layer.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<p><strong>Define validation ownership:<\/strong> Name who approves QA, clinical review, and release sign-off.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>If you&#8217;re building or buying healthcare software, start with the workflow, not the interface. Bridge the gap between product, compliance, and integration early, and the build becomes easier to trust, easier to validate, and much easier to scale. Visit <a href=\"https:\/\/www.bridge-global.com\">Bridge Global<\/a> to discuss healthcare software development, QA, and integration support for your next build.<\/p><!-- AddThis Advanced Settings generic via filter on the_content --><!-- AddThis Share Buttons generic via filter on the_content -->","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>You&#039;re probably at the point where the product looks real enough to sell, but the build still feels easier than the rules around it. A prototype for a clinic, hospital network, or payer-linked workflow can move fast in demos, then &hellip;<!-- AddThis Advanced Settings generic via filter on get_the_excerpt --><!-- AddThis Share Buttons generic via filter on get_the_excerpt --><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":224,"featured_media":58110,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1015],"tags":[1142,1160,1405,1490,1942],"class_list":["post-58111","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-healthcare","tag-hipaa-compliance","tag-medical-software","tag-fhir-integration","tag-healthtech-development","tag-healthcare-apps"],"featured_image_src":"https:\/\/www.bridge-global.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/application-development-in-healthcare-medical-technology.jpg","author_info":{"display_name":"Stephanie Cornelissen","author_link":"https:\/\/www.bridge-global.com\/blog\/author\/stephanie\/"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bridge-global.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/58111","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bridge-global.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bridge-global.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bridge-global.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/224"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bridge-global.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=58111"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.bridge-global.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/58111\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":58122,"href":"https:\/\/www.bridge-global.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/58111\/revisions\/58122"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bridge-global.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/58110"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bridge-global.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=58111"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bridge-global.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=58111"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bridge-global.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=58111"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}