Using dependency/association rules to find indications for computed tomography in a head trauma dataset

Artificial Intelligence in Medicine

Volumn 26, Issue 1-2, 2002, Pages 55-68

  Imberman, Susan P ^a   Domanski, Bernard ^a   Thompson, Hilary W ^b  

^a CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

^b LSU EYE CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Association rules; Computed tomography; Dependency rules; Head trauma; Intelligent data analysis; Interestingness

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; BOOLEAN FUNCTIONS; COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; DATA MINING; DATA REDUCTION;

ASSOCIATION RULES;

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE;

ALGORITHM; ANALYTIC METHOD; ARTICLE; CHI SQUARE TEST; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; EXPERT SYSTEM; HEAD INJURY; HUMAN; INFORMATION SCIENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY;

ALGORITHMS; ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; CRANIOCEREBRAL TRAUMA; DATABASES, FACTUAL; HUMANS; INFORMATION STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 0036753864     PISSN: 09333657     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0933-3657(02)00052-0     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Agrawal R, Mannila S, Ramakrishnan H, Toivonen H, Verkamo AI. Fast discovery of association rules. In: Fayyad UM, Piatetsky-Shapiro G, Smyth P, Ramasamy U, editors. Advances in knowledge discovery and data mining. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press, 1996. p. 307-28.
2. Agrawal R, Imielinsk T, Swami A. Mining association rules between sets of items in large databases. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD International Conference on the Management of Data, 1993. p. 207-16.
3. Brin S, Motwani R, Ullman J, Tsur S. Dynamic itemset counting and implication rules for market basket data. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, 1997. p. 255-64.
4. Dempster A.P., Laird N.M., Rubin D.B. Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm. J. Royal Stat. Soc. Ser. B. 39:1977;1-38.
5. Domanski B. Discovering the relationships between metrics. In: Proceedings of the 1996 Computer Measurement Group, 1996 Dec; San Diego CA. p. 309-13.
6. Fayyad UM, Piaetsky-Shapiro G, Smyth P. From data mining to knowledge discovery: an overview. In: Fayyad UM, Piatetsky-Shapiro G, Smyth P, Ramasamy U, editors. Advances in knowledge discovery and data mining. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press, 1996. p. 1-34.
7. Imberman S.P. Comparative statistical analyses of automated Booleanization methods for data mining programs, Doctoral dissertation. City University of New York, 1999. UMI Microform, 9924820.
8. Haydel M.J., Preston C.A., Mills T.J., Luber S., Blaudeau E., DeBlieux P.M.C. Indications for computed tomography in patients with minor head injury. N. Engl. J. Med. 343:2000;100-105.
9. Orchard RA. On the determination of relationships between computer system state variables. Bell Laboratories Technical Memorandum, January 15 1975.
10. Reinus W.R., Wippold F.J. Jr., Erickson K.K. Practical selection criteria for non-contrast cranial computed tomography in patients with head trauma. Ann. Emerg. Med. 22:1993;1148-1155.
11. Sahar S, Mansour Y. An empirical evaluation of objective interestingness criteria. In: Proceedings of the SPIE Conference on Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 1999. p. 63-74.
12. Silberschatz A., Tuzhilin A. What makes patterns interesting in knowledge discovery systems. IEEE Trans. Knowledge Data Eng. 8:1996;970-974.
13. Silverstein C., Brin S., Motwani R. Beyond market baskets: generalizing association rules to dependence rules. Data Min. Knowledge Discovery. 2:1998;39-68.