Assessing applicability of ontological principles to different types of biomedical vocabularies

Methods of Information in Medicine

Volumn 48, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 459-467

  Ingenerf, J ^a   Linder, R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LÜBECK   (Germany)

Author keywords

Controlled vocabularies; Logic; Medical informatics standards; Semantics; Terminology

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DOCUMENTATION; HUMAN; KNOWLEDGE; LINGUISTICS; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; MESH HEADING; NOMENCLATURE; STANDARD; SYSTEMATIZED NOMENCLATURE OF MEDICINE; UNITED STATES;

HUMANS; KNOWLEDGE; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; MEDICAL SUBJECT HEADINGS; SUBJECT HEADINGS; SYSTEMATIZED NOMENCLATURE OF MEDICINE; TERMINOLOGY AS TOPIC; UNITED STATES; VOCABULARY, CONTROLLED;

EID: 76649117776     PISSN: 00261270     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3414/ME0628     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (33)

1. Rogers JE. Quality assurance of medical ontologies. Methods Inf Med 2006; 45 (3): 267-274.
2. Welty CA, Guarino N. Support for ontological analysis of taxonomic relationships. J Data and Knowledge Engineering 2001; 39 (1): 51-74.
3. Smith B, Ceusters W, Klagges B, Köhler J, Kumar A, Lomax J, et al. Relations in biomedical ontologies. Genome Biology 2005; 6 (5): R46. See http://genomebiology.com/2005/6/5/R46.
4. Ceusters W, Smith B, Kumar A, Dhaen C. Mistakes in medical ontologies: Where do they come from and how can they be detected? Stud Health Technol Inform 2004; 102: 145-163.
5. Zhang S, Bodenreider O. Law and order: Assessing and enforcing compliance with ontological modeling principles in the Foundational Model of Anatomy. Comput Biol Med 2006; 36 (7-8): 674-693.
6. ISO/FDIS 1087. Terminology work - Vocabulary -Part 1: Theory and application. Berlin: Beuth; 2000.
7. ISO/TS 17117. Health informatics - Controlled health vocabularies - Vocabulary structure and high-level indicators. Geneva: ISO/TC215 (WG 3); 2002. See http://www.tc215wg3.nhs.uk.
8. Guarino N, Welty CA. Evaluating Ontological Decisions with OntoClean. Communications of the ACM 2002; 45(2): 61-65.
9. Spackman KA, Reynoso G. Examining SNOMED from the Perspective of Formal Ontological Principles: Some Preliminary Analysis and Observations. In: Hahn U, editor. 1st Int Workshop on Formal Biomedical Knowledge Representation (KRMED 2004). See http://CEUR-WS.org/Vol-102/; 2004. pp 72-80.
10. Bodenreider O, Smith B, Burgun A. The Ontology- Epistemology Divide: A Case Study in Medical Terminology. In: Varzi A, Vieu, L, editors. Int Conf on Formal Ontology and Information Systems (FOIS 2004). Amsterdam: IOS-Press; 2004. pp 185-195.
11. Baader F, Calvanese D, McGuinness D, Nardi D, Patel-Schneider P. The Description Logic Handbook. Cambridge: University Press (ISBN 0-521-78176-0); 2003.
12. ISO 2788. Documentation - Guidelines for the development of monolingual thesauri, Second edition. Berlin: Beuth; 1986.
13. Nelson SJ, Johnston D, Humphreys BL. Relationships in Medical Subject Headings (MeSH), chapter 11. In: Bean CA, Green R, editors. Relationships in the Organization of Knowledge. New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 2001. pp 171-184. See http://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/meshrels.html.
14. Welty CA, Jenkins J. Formal ontology for subject. Data and Knowledge Engineering 1999; 31: 155-181.
15. Wüster E. Begriffs- und Themaklassifikation: Unterschiede in ihrem Wesen und in ihrer Anwendung. Nachrichten für Dokumentation 1971; 22 (3 and 4): 98-104 and 143-150.
16. Rosch E. Principles of Categorization. In: Rosch E, Lloyd B, editors. Cognition and Categorization. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1978. pp 27-48.
17. Soualmia LF, Golbreich C, Darmoni SJ. Representing the MeSH in OWL: Towards a Semi-Automatic Migration. In: Hahn U, editor. 1st Int Workshop on Formal Biomedical Knowledge Representation (KR-MED 2004); see http://CEUR-WS.org/Vol-102/; 2004. pp 81-87.
18. Nelson SJ, Schopen M, Savage AG, Schulman JL, Arluk N. The MeSH translation maintenance system: structure, interface design, and implementation. Stud Health Technol Inform 2004; 107 (PT 1): 67.
19. Smith B, Ceusters W. Ontology as the Core Discipline of Biomedical Informatics - Legacies of the Past and Recommendations for the Future Direction of Research. In: Crnkovic GD, Stuart S, editors. Computing, Philosophy, and Cognitive Science. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Press; 2007. pp 104-122.
20. Ingenerf J, Giere W. Concept oriented Standardization and Statistics oriented Classification: Continuing the Classification versus Nomenclature Controversy. Methods Inf Med 1998; 37 (4-5): 527-539.
21. Bowman S. Coordinating SNOMED CT and ICD-10: Getting the Most out of Electronic Health Record Systems. J Ahima 2005; 76 (7): 60-61.
22. Elkin PL, Brown SH. Automated enhancement of description logic-defined terminologies to facilitate mapping to ICD9-CM. J Biomed Inform 2002; 35 (5-6): 281-288.
23. Schopen M, Krause B. Nomenclatures and Thesauri - Alternatives to the ICD-10 Alphabetical Index? WHO Family of International Classification (WHO-FIC) Network Meeting in Reykjavic (Iceland), October 2004. See http://www.dimdi.de/ static/en/klassi/koop/who/etc/etc-04-40.pdf.
24. Wasserman H, Wang J. An applied evaluation of SNOMED CT as a clinical vocabulary for the computerized diagnosis and problem list. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2003: 699-703.
25. Rosenbloom ST, Miller RA, Johnson KB, Elkin PL, Brown SH. Interface terminologies: facilitating direct entry of clinical data into electronic health record systems. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2006; 13 (3): 277-288.
26. Ingenerf J, Pöppl SJ. Biomedical Vocabularies - the Demand for Differentiation. Stud Health Technol Inform 2007; 129 (Pt 1): 610-615.
27. WHO. Revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD). See http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/ICDRevision/en/.
28. Rector AL, Brandt S. Why do it the hard way? The case for an expressive description logic for SNOMED. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2008; 15 (6): 744-751.
29. HL7 Terminfo Project. See http://www.hl7.org/Special/committees/terminfo/ index.cfm.
30. Markwell D, Sato L, Cheetham E. Representing clinical information using SNOMED Clinical Terms with different structural information models. In: Cornet R, Spackman KA, editors. 3rd Int Conf on Knowledge Representation in Medicine (KR-MED 2008). See http://www.kr-med.org/2008/ (http://CEUR-WS.org/Vol-410/); 2008. pp 72-79.
31. Stuart-Buttle CDG, Ashely JSA, O'Neil M. Clinical Vocabularies - Their Potential as Classifications. In: Masys DR, editor. AMIA Annual Fall Symposium (former SCAMC); Philadelphia: Hanley and Belfus, Inc.; 1997. pp 892-896.
32. Rector AL, Nowlan WA, Kay S. Foundations for an electronic medical record. Methods Inf Med 1991; 30: 179-186.
33. Frank E, Paynter GW. Predicting library of congress classifications from library of congress subject headings. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2004; 55 (3): 214-227.