Semantic representation of consumer questions and physician answers

International Journal of Medical Informatics

Volumn 75, Issue 7, 2006, Pages 513-529

  Slaughter, Laura A ^a   Soergel, Dagobert ^b   Rindflesch, Thomas C ^c  

^a OSLO UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^c NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

Information retrieval; Natural language processing; Public health; Semantic processing; Unified Medical Language System

Indexed keywords

GRAPHIC METHODS; HEALTH; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; MEDICAL PROBLEMS; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS; WEBSITES;

PUBLIC HEALTH; SEMANTIC PROCESSING; UNIFIED MEDICAL LANGUAGE SYSTEM;

SEMANTICS;

ARTICLE; CAUSAL ATTRIBUTION; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CONSUMER; CONSUMER HEALTH INFORMATION; DISCOURSE ANALYSIS; FREQUENCY ANALYSIS; HUMAN; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; MEDICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM; PHYSICIAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SEMANTICS;

HUMANS; INTERNET; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING; PHYSICIAN-PATIENT RELATIONS; SEMANTICS; SUBJECT HEADINGS; UNIFIED MEDICAL LANGUAGE SYSTEM;

EID: 33646717529     PISSN: 13865056     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2005.07.025     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Zeng Q., Kogan S., Ash N., Greenes R., and Boxwala A. Characteristics of consumer terminology for health information retrieval. Meth. Inform. Med. 41 (2002) 289-298
2. Zeng Q.T., Kogan S., Plovnick R., Crowell J., Greenes R.A., and Lacroix E.M. Positive attitude and failed queries: an exploration of the conundrums of consumer health information retrieval. Int. J. Med. Inform. 73 1 (2004) 45-55
3. Bader J.L., and Theofanos M.F. Searching for cancer information on the internet: analyzing natural language search queries. J. Med. Internet Res. 5 4 (2003) e31
4. Lindberg D., Humphrey B., and McCray A. The Unified Medical Language System. Meth. Inform. Med. 32 (1993) 281-289
5. McCray A., and Hole W. The scope and structure of the first version of the UMLS Semantic Network. Proc. Annu. Symp. Comput. Appl. Med. Care (1990) 126-130
6. Soergel D. Some remarks on information languages, their analysis and comparison. Inform. Storage Retrieval 3 (1967) 219-291
7. Green R. Relationships in the organization of knowledge: an overview. In: Bean C.A., and Green R. (Eds). Relationships in the Organization of Knowledge (2001), Kluwer Academic Publishers 3-18
8. N. Guarino, C. Welty, Identity and subsumption, in: R. Green, C. Bean, S. Hyon Myaeng (Eds.), The Semantics of Relationships: An Interdisciplinary Perspective, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2002, pp. 111-126.
9. Brachman R.J. What IS-A is and isn't: an analysis of taxonomic links in semantics networks. IEEE Comput. 16 10 (1983) 30-36
10. Allen J.F. Time and time again: the many ways to represent time. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 4 (1991) 341-356
11. Odell J. Six different kinds of composition. J. Object-Oriented Programm. (1994) 8
12. Miller G., Beckwith R., Fellbaum C., Gross D., and Miller K. Five papers on WordNet. Int. J. Lexicogr. 3 4. (1990) special issue
13. Rogers J., and Rector A. GALEN's model of parts and wholes: experience and comparison. In: Overhage J.M. (Ed). American Medical Informatics Association Symposium (2000), Hanley & Belfus Inc., Philadelphia 714-718
14. Rector A.L., Wroe C., Rogers J., and Roberts A. Untangling taxonomies and relationships: personal and practical problems in loosely coupled development of large ontologies. Proceedings of the K-CAP'01 (2001), ACM, Victoria, BC 139-146
15. Detwiler L.T., Chung E., Li A., Mejino J.L., Agoncillo A.V., Brinkley J.F., Rosse C., and Shapiro L.G. A relation-centric query engine for the foundational model of anatomy. Proceedings of the MedInfo'2004. San Francisco, CA (2004) 341-345
16. Smith B., and Rosse C. The role of foundational relations in the alignment of biomedical ontologies. Proceedings of the MedInfo'2004. San Francisco, CA (2004) 444-448
17. Chakravarthy A., and Haase K. NetSerf: using semantic knowledge to find internet information archives. Proceedings of the 18th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. Seattle, WA (1995) 4-11
18. Pollitt A.S., Smith M.P., Treglown M., and Braekevelt P.A.J. View-based searching systems-progress towards effective disintermediation. Proceedings of the 20th International Online Information Meeting. London, December (1996), Learned Information Limited 433-446
19. Khoo C., and Myaeng S.H. Identifying semantic relations to text for information retrieval and information extraction. In: Green R., Bean C.A., and Myaeng S.H. (Eds). The Semantics of Relationships: An Interdisciplinary Perspective (2002), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht 161-180
20. Khoo C., Myaeng S.H., and Oddy R. Using cause-effect relations in text to improve information retrieval precision. Inform. Process. Manage. 37 1 (2001) 119-145
21. Miles-Board T., Kampa S., Carr L., and Hall W. Hypertext in the semantic web. Proceedings of the HT'01. Aarhus, Denmark (2001)
22. Mendonca E., Johnson S.B., Seol Y.H., and Cimino J.J. Analyzing the semantics of patient data to rank records of literature retrieval. Proceedings of the ACL-02 Workshop on Natural Processing in the Biomedical Domain. June 11 (2002), Association for Computational Linguistics, Philadelphia, PA
23. Mendonca E.A., and Cimino J.J. Automated knowledge extraction from MEDLINE citations. Proc. AMIA Symp. (2000) 575-579
24. Brandt C.A., Fernandes L.A., Powsner S.M., Ruskin K.J., and Miller P.L. Using coded semantic relationships to retrieve and structure clinical reference information. Proceedings of the 1997 American Medical Informatics Association Annual Fall Symposium. Nashville, TN, October 25-29 (1997)
25. Bechhofer S., Stevens R., Ng G., Jacoby A., and Goble C.A. Guiding the user: an ontology driven interface. In: Paton N.W., and Griffiths T. (Eds). UIDIS: Workshop on User Interfaces to Data Intensive Systems. Edinburgh (1999) 158-161
26. Kintsch W. Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition (1998), Cambridge University Press, New York
27. Jonassen D., Beissner K., and Yacci M. Structural Knowledge: Techniques for Representing, Conveying, and Acquiring Structural Knowledge (1993), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ
28. Medical Library Association, MLANET: A User's Guide to Finding and Evaluating Health Info on the Web. http://www.mlanet.org/resources/userguide.html.
29. Sowa J.F. Conceptual graphs summary. In: Eklund P., Nagle T., Nagle J., and Gerholz L. (Eds). Conceptual Structures: Current Research and Practice (1992), Ellis Horwood 3-52
30. L. Slaughter, Semantic relationships in health consumer questions and physicians' answers: a basis for representing medical knowledge and for concept exploration interfaces, Doctoral Dissertation, University of Maryland at College Park, 2002, Dissertation Abstracts International.
31. Slaughter L.A., and Soergel D. How physicians' answers relate to health consumers' questions. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (ASIST) (2003) 28-39
32. Yu H., Friedman C., Rhzetsky A., and Kra P. Representing genomic knowledge in the UMLS Semantic Network. Proc. AMIA Symp. (1999) 181-185
33. Soergel D., Tse T., and Slaughter L. Helping healthcare consumers understand: an "interpretive layer" for finding and making sense of medical information. Medinfo (2004) 931-935
34. Rindflesch T.C., and Fiszman M. The interaction of domain knowledge and linguistic structure in natural language processing: interpreting hypernymic propositions in biomedical text. J. Biomed. Inform. 36 6 (2003) 462-477
35. Johnson S.B., Aguirre A., Peng P., and Cimino J. Interpreting natural language queries using the UMLS. Proc. Annu. Symp. Comput. Appl. Med. Care (1993) 294-298