PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 8168258

Supporting interoperability between medical knowledge-based systems: experience from pilot implementations.

Abstract

Interoperability may be defined as the ability of knowledge-based systems to function together in a symbiotic manner. Cooperativity implies interoperability but with the added benefit that the output quality of the cooperative network exceeds the overall performance of the participating sub-systems. A number of candidate architectures to support interoperability and cooperativity between medical knowledge-based systems in laboratory medicine domains are now becoming available. Using rapid prototyping techniques, we have demonstrated the feasibility of one of these approaches by carrying out pilot implementations in two unrelated laboratory medicine domains (an internal consistency checking system for validating patients' results in the laboratory and a system for generating alarms and alerts in high dependency units based on laboratory data). The results of this study are discussed in the context of the available techniques so as to provide a basis for further development of cooperative systems in laboratory medicine.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

G P Boran, P G Given, J B Grimson, R R O'Moore. 1993-12-15. Supporting interoperability between medical knowledge-based systems: experience from pilot implementations.. https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-8981(93)90089-m

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

[Quality assurance of laboratories outside hospitals. Use of internal control].

Norway has a national programme for quality assurance of laboratory analyses performed in general practice. A central laboratory distributes control material, and a local team gives practical assistance in each county. To perform laboratory tests properly, the use of quality control material ("internal control") is essential. The users' control results provide a basis for finding both systematic error and the analytical coefficient of variation. The analytical and biological coefficients of variation can be used to calculate the confidence intervals around laboratory test results, and around medical decision thresholds. It is also possible to calculate the magnitude of significant changes in serial results ("critical difference"). In Rogaland county, 11-14 general practitioners showed an analytical coefficient of variation ranging from 0.5 to 5.0% on haemoglobin determination, from 1.2 to 9.9% on glucose, and from 3.1 to 10.5% on prothrombin time. Five general practitioners showed an analytical coefficient of variation from 3.3 to 9.7% for cholesterol. This gives a critical difference ranging from 7.8 to 15.8% for haemoglobin and 18.8 to 31.6% for cholesterol. We present a diagram that can be used to find the critical difference for any test. Such an evaluation of laboratory analyses should become routine in all near-patient testing.

Chemistry, Clinical

Information theoretical concepts in clinical chemistry: the use of spreadsheet programs for convenient calculation of information theoretical quantities.

Information theoretical concepts can be used as most valuable tools for evaluating clinical chemical tests. They offer several advantages over the conventional test evaluation by Bayesian concepts. Although long known, information theory has failed to gain widespread acceptance among clinical chemists, probably due to the rather laborious computation of the necessary quantities. To resolve this technical problem, this paper demonstrates how commonly available computer spreadsheet programs can assist in the computation of information theoretical quantities such as the diverse entropies and the information content. Two spreadsheet versions are presented: firstly, a working sheet is developed for information theoretical evaluation of a two-by-two contingency table corresponding to a dichotomous diagnostic problem (e.g., diseased versus non-diseased) and a dichotomous diagnostic test outcome (e.g., normal versus abnormal), and secondly, a working sheet is shown for a more general situation with up to ten diagnostic alternatives and up to ten possible test outcomes. Typical examples for application of these tools are demonstrated.

Chemistry, Clinical