Documenting 'What Nurses Do' - Moving Beyond Coding and Classification

Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association

Volumn 4, Issue SUPPL., 1997, Pages 141-145

  Mead, Charles N ^a,b   Henry, Suzanne Bakken ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b CareCentric Solutions   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLASSIFICATION; DOCUMENTATION; FEASIBILITY STUDY; LINGUISTICS; MEDICAL RECORD; NOMENCLATURE; NURSING CARE;

ABSTRACTING AND INDEXING; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; NURSING CARE; NURSING RECORDS; TERMINOLOGY; VOCABULARY, CONTROLLED;

EID: 0347840397     PISSN: 10675027     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Dick RS, Steen EB: The computer-based patient record: an essential technology for health care. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1991.
2. Chute CG, Atken GE, Ihrke DM: An empirical evaluation of concept capture by clinical classifications. In: Lun KC, Degoulet P, Piemme TE, et al., eds. Medlnfo92. Geneva, Switzerland: 1992.
3. Chute CG, Cohn SP, E. CK, Oliver DE, Campbell JR: The content coverage of clinical classifications. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 1996; 3(3): 224-233.
4. Campbell J, Carpenter P, Sneiderman C, Cohn S, Chute C, Warren J: Phase II evaluation of clinical coding schemes: completeness, taxonomy, mapping, definitions, and clarity. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 1997;4(3): 238-251.
5. Sager N, Lyman M, Bucknall C, Nhan N, Tick L: Natural language Processing and the Representation of Clinical Data. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 1994; 1(2):142-160.
6. Henry SB, Holzemer WL, Reilly CA, Campbell KE: Terms used by nurses to describe patient problems: Can SNOMED III represent nursing concepts in the patient record? Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 1994; 1(1): 61-74.
7. Benner P: From novice to expert: Power and excellence in nursing practice. Palo Alto, California: Addison-Wesley, 1984.
8. McCormick K, Lang N, Zielstorff R, Milholland DK, Saba V, Jacox A: Toward standard classification schemes for nursing language: Recommendations of the American Nurses Association Steering Committee on Databases to Support Nursing Practice. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 1994; 1(6): 421-427.
9. McCloskey JC, Bulechek GM: Nursing interventions classification, 2nd ed. St. Louis: C. V. Mosby, 1996.
10. Iowa Intervention Project: The NIC taxonomy structure. Image: Journal of Nursing Scholarship 1993; 25: 187-192.
11. Martin KS, Scheet NJ: The Omaha System: A community health nursing data management model. In: Lun KC, Degoulet P, Piemme TE, et al., eds. Medlnfo92, Geneva, Switzerland 1992.
12. Saba VK, Zuckerman AE: A new home health classification method. Caring Magazine 1992; 11(9): 27-34.
13. Ozbolt JG: From minimum data to maximum impact: using clinical data to strengthen patient care. Advanced Practice Nursing Quarterly 1996; 1(4): 62-69.
14. Grobe SJ: The Nursing Intervention Lexicon and Taxonomy: Implications for representing nursing care data in automated records. Holistic Nursing Practice 1996; 11(1): 48-63
15. Nielsen GH, Mortensen RA: The architecture for an International Classification of Nursing Practice (ICNP). International Nursing Review 1996; 43(6): 175-182.
16. Shaughnessy P: Outcome-Based Quality Improvement: National Association of Home Care, 1995.
17. Henry SB, Mead CN: Standardized nursing classification systems: Necessary, but not sufficient for representing what nurses do. In: Cimino JJ, ed. Fall Symposium of the American Medical Informatics Association, Washington, DC, 1996.
18. Henry SB, Mead CN: Nursing classification systems: Necessary but not sufficient for representing what nurses do for inclusion in computer-based patient record systems. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 1997; 4(3): 222-232.
19. Ingenerf J: Taxonomic vocabularies in medicine: the intention of usage determines different established structures. In: Groenes RA, Peterson HE, Protti DJ, eds. MedInfo95, Vancouver, British Columbia, 1995.
20. Campbell KE, Musen M: Representation of clinical data using SNOMED III and conceptual graphs. In: Frisse M, ed. Symposium on Computer Applications in Medical Care, Baltimore, MD, 1992.
21. Bernauer J: Conceptual graphs as an operational model for descriptive findings. In: Frisse M, ed. 16th Annual Symposium for Computer Applications in Medical Care, Baltimore, MD, 1992.
22. Sowa J: Conceptual structures. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison Wesley, 1984.
23. Johnson SB: Conceptual graph grammar - A simple formalism for sublanguage. International Medical Informatics Association Working Group 6 Conference on Natural Language and Medical Concept Representation, Jacksonville, FL 1997.