Mapping parish nurse documentation into the nursing interventions classification: A research method

CIN - Computers Informatics Nursing

Volumn 23, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 220-229

  Burkhart, Lisa ^a   Konicek, Debra ^b   Moorhead, Sue ^c   Androwich, Ida ^a  

^a LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO   (United States)

^b North Carolina   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF IOWA COLLEGE OF NURSING   (United States)

Author keywords

Mapping; Parish nursing; Research method; Standardized taxonomy

Indexed keywords

EID: 23744441243     PISSN: 15382931     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00024665-200507000-00010     Document Type: Review

References (44)

1. American Society for Testing and Materials. Terminology in ASTM standards. In: Form and Style for ASTM Standards. 8th ed. Philadelphia: American Society for Testing and Materials; 1989:27-34.
2. Bakken S. An informatics infrastructure is essential for evidence-based practice. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2001;8(3):199-201.
3. Bakken S, Campbell KE, Cimino JJ, Huff SM, Hammond WE. Toward vocabulary domain specifications for Health Level 7-coded data elements. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2000;7(4):333-342.
4. Bakken S, Hyun S, Friedman C, Johnson S. A comparison of semantic categories of the ISO reference terminology models for nursing and the MedLEE natural language processing system. Medinfo. 2004:472-476.
5. Bakken S, Warren JM, Lundberg C, et al. An evaluation of the usefulness of two terminology models for integrating nursing diagnosis concepts in SNOMED clinical terms. Int J Med Inform. 2002;68:71-77.
6. Chute CG, Cohn SP, Campbell JR. A framework for comprehensive health terminology systems in the United States: development guidelines, criteria for selection, and public policy implications. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1998;5(6):503-510.
7. Chute CG, Cohn SP, Campbell KE, Oliver DE, Campbell JR. The content coverage of clinical classifications. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1996;3(3):224-233.
8. Elfrink V, Bakken S, Coenen A, McNeil B, Bickford C. Standardized nursing vocabularies: a foundation for quality care. Semin Oncol Nurs. 2001;17(1):18-23.
9. Han S, Kwak M, Kim S, et al. A comparative study on concept representation between the UMLS and the clinical terms in Korean medical records. Medinfo. 2004:616-620.
10. Hardiker NR, Hoy D, Casey A. Standards of nursing terminology. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2000;7(6):523-528.
11. McCormick KA, 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 clinical nursing practice. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1994;1(6):421-427.
12. Ozbolt JG. From minimum data to maximum impact: using clinical data to strengthen patient care. Adv Pract Nurs Q. 1996;1(4):62-69.
13. Ozbolt J. Terminology standards for nursing: collaboration at the summit. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2000;7(6):517-522.
14. Ryan J, Delaney C. Nursing minimum data set. Annu Rev Nurs Res. 1005;13:169-194.
15. Warren JJ, Coenen A. International classification for nursing practice: most-frequently asked questions. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1998;5(4):335-336.
16. Werley HH, Lang NM. Identification of the Nursing Minimum Data Set. New York: Springer; 1988.
17. Bakken S, Cashen MS, Mendonca EA, O'Brien A, Zieniewicz J. Representing nursing activities within a concept-oriented terminological system: evaluation of a type definition. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2000;7(1):81-90.
18. Simpson RL. Agreement on nursing terminology: the key to technology-based outcomes. Semin Nurs Manag. 1996;4(3): 182-184.
19. Aristotle. Posterior analytics. In: Moser PK, vander Nat A, eds. Human Knowledge: Classical and Contemporary Approaches. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford; 1995:63-80.
20. Ogden CK, Richards IA. The Meaning of Meaning: A Study of the Influence of Language Upon Thought and of the Science of Symbolism. 10th ed. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul; 1923.
21. Burkhart, L Knowledge Representation: Measuring the Domain Completeness of the Nursing Interventions Classification in Parish Nurse Documentation [dissertation]. Chicago, Ill: Niehoff School of Nursing, Loyola University Chicago; 2002.
22. Imel M. Mapping from a clinical terminology to a classification. Paper presented at: AHIMA Convention; October 20-22, 2003; Minneapolis, MN.
23. Campbell JR, Payne TH. A Comparison of Four Schemes for Codification of Problem Lists: Proceedings of the Annual Symposium on Computer Applications in Medical Care. Philadelphia: Hanley Belfus; 1994:201-205.
24. Campbell JR, Carpenter PC, Sneiderman C, Cohn S, Chute CG, Warren J. Phase II evaluation of clinical coding schemes: completeness, taxonomy, mapping, definitions, and clarity. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1997;4(3):238-251.
25. Lange LL. Representation of everyday clinical nursing language in UMLS and SNOMED. Proc AMIA Fall Symp. 1996:140-144.
26. Liu H, Johnson SB, Friedman C. Automatic resolution of ambiguous terms based on machine learning and conceptual relations in the UMLS. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2002;9(6):621-636.
27. Friedman C, Shagina L, Lussier Y, Hripcsak G. Automated encoding of clinical documents based on natural language processing. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2004;11(5):392-342.
28. Henry SB, Holzemer WL, Randell C, Hsieh SF, Miller TJ. Comparison of nursing interventions classification and current procedural terminology codes for categorizing nursing activities. Image J Nurs Sch. 1997;29(2):133-138.
29. Holzemer WL, Henry SB, Dawson C, Bain SC, Hsieh SF. An evaluation of the utility of the home healthcare classification for categorizing patient problems and nursing interventions from the hospital setting. In: Gerdin U, Tallberg M, Wainwright P, eds. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics: Nursing Informatics: The Impact of Nursing Knowledge on Healthcare Informatics. Washington, DC: IOS Press; 1997:21-26.
30. Parlocha PK, Henry SB, The usefulness of the Georgetown home healthcare classification system for coding patient problems and nursing interventions in psychiatric home care. Comput Nurs. 1998;16(1):45-52.
31. Martin KS, Norris J, Leak GK. Psychometric analysis of the problem rating scale for outcomes. Outcomes Manag Nurs Pract. 1999;3(1):20-25.
32. Bowles KH. Application of the Omaha system in acute care. Res Nurs Health. 2000;23(2):93-105.
33. Hardiker NR, Rector AL. Structural validation for nursing terminologies. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2001;8(3):212-221.
34. Burkhart L, Androwich I. Measuring the domain completeness of the Nursing Interventions Classification in Parish Nurse Documentation. Comput Inform Nurs. 2004;22(2):72-82.
35. Bakken S, Cimino JJ, Haskell R, et al. Evaluation of the clinical LOINC (logical observation identifiers, names, and codes) semantic structure as a terminology model for standardized assessment measures. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2000;7(6):529-538.
36. McCloskey J, Bulechek G. Iowa Intervention Project: Nursing Interventions Classification (NIC). St Louis: Mosby; 2000.
37. Dochterman J, Bulechek G. Iowa Intervention Project: Nursing Interventions Classification (NIC). St Louis: Mosby; 2004.
38. Moorhead S, Delaney C. Mapping nursing intervention data into the nursing interventions classification (NIC): process and rules. Nurs Diagn. 1997;8(4):137-144.
39. Delaney C, Moorhead S. Synthesis of methods, rules, and issues of standardizing nursing intervention language mapping. Nurs Diagn. 1997;8(4):152-156.
40. National Library of Medicine. HHS launches new efforts to promote paperless health care system. Available at:http://www.nlm.nih.gov/news/ press_releases/paperlesspr03.html. Accessed November 3, 2003.
41. Johnson M, Bulechek G, Dochterman J, Maas M, Moorhead S. Nursing Diagnoses, Outcomes, and Interventions: NANDA, NOC and NIC Linkages. St Louis: Mosby; 2001.
42. Brennan PG, Hays BJ. The kappa statistic for establishing interrater reliability in the secondary analysis of qualitative clinical data. Res Nurs Health. 1992;15:153-158.
43. SNOMED International. SNOMED Clinical Terms User Guide. Northfield, Ill: SNOMED International; 2004.
44. Henry SB, Holzerner WL, Reilly CA, Campbell KE. Terms used by nurses to describe patient problems: can SNOMED III represent nursing concepts in the patient record? J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1994;1(1):61-74.