MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107658719 · doi:10.1109/hicss.2011.61

An Ontology-Based Electronic Medical Record for Chronic Disease Management

2011· article· en· W2107658719 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ashraf Mohammed Iqbal, Michael Shepherd, Syed Sibte Raza Abidi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersDalhousie University
KeywordsOntologyInteroperabilityComputer scienceSemantic interoperabilityClinical decision support systemOntology-based data integrationDiseaseUpper ontologyKnowledge managementDecision support systemChronic diseaseMedical recordSemantic WebInformation retrievalWorld Wide WebMedicineData miningFamily medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Effective chronic disease management ensures better treatment and reduces medical costs. Representing knowledge through building an ontology for Electronic Medical Records (EMRs) is important to achieve semantic interoperability among healthcare information systems and to better execute decision support systems. In this paper, an ontology-based EMR focusing on Chronic Disease Management is proposed. The W3C Computer-based Patient Record ontology is customized and augmented with concepts and attributes from the Western Health Infostructure Canada chronic disease management model and the American Society for Testing and Materials International EHR. The result is an EMR ontology capable of representing knowledge about chronic disease. All of the clinical actions of the proposed ontology were found to map to HL7 RIM classes. Such an EMR ontology for chronic disease management can support reasoning for clinical decision support systems as well as act as a switching language from one EMR standard to another for chronic disease knowledge.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBiomedical Text Mining and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207