A Computer-Interpretable Guideline for COVID-19: Rapid Development and Dissemination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is a global pandemic that is affecting more than 200 countries worldwide. Efficient diagnosis and treatment are crucial to combat the disease. Computer-interpretable guidelines (CIGs) can aid the broad global adoption of evidence-based diagnosis and treatment knowledge. However, currently, no internationally shareable CIG exists. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to establish a rapid CIG development and dissemination approach and apply it to develop a shareable CIG for COVID-19. METHODS: A 6-step rapid CIG development and dissemination approach was designed and applied. Processes, roles, and deliverable artifacts were specified in this approach to eliminate ambiguities during development of the CIG. The Guideline Definition Language (GDL) was used to capture the clinical rules. A CIG for COVID-19 was developed by translating, interpreting, annotating, extracting, and formalizing the Chinese COVID-19 diagnosis and treatment guideline. A prototype application was implemented to validate the CIG. RESULTS: We used 27 archetypes for the COVID-19 guideline. We developed 18 GDL rules to cover the diagnosis and treatment suggestion algorithms in the narrative guideline. The CIG was further translated to object data model and Drools rules to facilitate its use by people who do not employ the non-openEHR archetype. The prototype application validated the correctness of the CIG with a public data set. Both the GDL rules and Drools rules have been disseminated on GitHub. CONCLUSIONS: Our rapid CIG development and dissemination approach accelerated the pace of COVID-19 CIG development. A validated COVID-19 CIG is now available to the public.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".