Cargando…

Using clinical reasoning ontologies to make smarter clinical decision support systems: a systematic review and data synthesis

OBJECTIVE: The study sought to describe the literature describing clinical reasoning ontology (CRO)–based clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) and identify and classify the medical knowledge and reasoning concepts and their properties within these ontologies to guide future research. METHODS: M...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dissanayake, Pavithra I, Colicchio, Tiago K, Cimino, James J
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6913230/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31592534
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocz169
_version_ 1783479622971686912
author Dissanayake, Pavithra I
Colicchio, Tiago K
Cimino, James J
author_facet Dissanayake, Pavithra I
Colicchio, Tiago K
Cimino, James J
author_sort Dissanayake, Pavithra I
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The study sought to describe the literature describing clinical reasoning ontology (CRO)–based clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) and identify and classify the medical knowledge and reasoning concepts and their properties within these ontologies to guide future research. METHODS: MEDLINE, Scopus, and Google Scholar were searched through January 30, 2019, for studies describing CRO-based CDSSs. Articles that explored the development or application of CROs or terminology were selected. Eligible articles were assessed for quality features of both CDSSs and CROs to determine the current practices. We then compiled concepts and properties used within the articles. RESULTS: We included 38 CRO-based CDSSs for the analysis. Diversity of the purpose and scope of their ontologies was seen, with a variety of knowledge sources were used for ontology development. We found 126 unique medical knowledge concepts, 38 unique reasoning concepts, and 240 unique properties (137 relationships and 103 attributes). Although there is a great diversity among the terms used across CROs, there is a significant overlap based on their descriptions. Only 5 studies described high quality assessment. CONCLUSION: We identified current practices used in CRO development and provided lists of medical knowledge concepts, reasoning concepts, and properties (relationships and attributes) used by CRO-based CDSSs. CRO developers reason that the inclusion of concepts used by clinicians’ during medical decision making has the potential to improve CDSS performance. However, at present, few CROs have been used for CDSSs, and high-quality studies describing CROs are sparse. Further research is required in developing high-quality CDSSs based on CROs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6913230
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69132302019-12-19 Using clinical reasoning ontologies to make smarter clinical decision support systems: a systematic review and data synthesis Dissanayake, Pavithra I Colicchio, Tiago K Cimino, James J J Am Med Inform Assoc Review OBJECTIVE: The study sought to describe the literature describing clinical reasoning ontology (CRO)–based clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) and identify and classify the medical knowledge and reasoning concepts and their properties within these ontologies to guide future research. METHODS: MEDLINE, Scopus, and Google Scholar were searched through January 30, 2019, for studies describing CRO-based CDSSs. Articles that explored the development or application of CROs or terminology were selected. Eligible articles were assessed for quality features of both CDSSs and CROs to determine the current practices. We then compiled concepts and properties used within the articles. RESULTS: We included 38 CRO-based CDSSs for the analysis. Diversity of the purpose and scope of their ontologies was seen, with a variety of knowledge sources were used for ontology development. We found 126 unique medical knowledge concepts, 38 unique reasoning concepts, and 240 unique properties (137 relationships and 103 attributes). Although there is a great diversity among the terms used across CROs, there is a significant overlap based on their descriptions. Only 5 studies described high quality assessment. CONCLUSION: We identified current practices used in CRO development and provided lists of medical knowledge concepts, reasoning concepts, and properties (relationships and attributes) used by CRO-based CDSSs. CRO developers reason that the inclusion of concepts used by clinicians’ during medical decision making has the potential to improve CDSS performance. However, at present, few CROs have been used for CDSSs, and high-quality studies describing CROs are sparse. Further research is required in developing high-quality CDSSs based on CROs. Oxford University Press 2019-10-08 /pmc/articles/PMC6913230/ /pubmed/31592534 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocz169 Text en © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Review
Dissanayake, Pavithra I
Colicchio, Tiago K
Cimino, James J
Using clinical reasoning ontologies to make smarter clinical decision support systems: a systematic review and data synthesis
title Using clinical reasoning ontologies to make smarter clinical decision support systems: a systematic review and data synthesis
title_full Using clinical reasoning ontologies to make smarter clinical decision support systems: a systematic review and data synthesis
title_fullStr Using clinical reasoning ontologies to make smarter clinical decision support systems: a systematic review and data synthesis
title_full_unstemmed Using clinical reasoning ontologies to make smarter clinical decision support systems: a systematic review and data synthesis
title_short Using clinical reasoning ontologies to make smarter clinical decision support systems: a systematic review and data synthesis
title_sort using clinical reasoning ontologies to make smarter clinical decision support systems: a systematic review and data synthesis
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6913230/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31592534
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocz169
work_keys_str_mv AT dissanayakepavithrai usingclinicalreasoningontologiestomakesmarterclinicaldecisionsupportsystemsasystematicreviewanddatasynthesis
AT colicchiotiagok usingclinicalreasoningontologiestomakesmarterclinicaldecisionsupportsystemsasystematicreviewanddatasynthesis
AT ciminojamesj usingclinicalreasoningontologiestomakesmarterclinicaldecisionsupportsystemsasystematicreviewanddatasynthesis