Authoring and verification of clinical guidelines: A model driven approach

Journal of Biomedical Informatics

Volumn 43, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 520-536

  Pérez, Beatriz ^a   Porres, Ivan ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LA RIOJA   (Spain)

^b ÅBO AKADEMI UNIVERSITY   (Finland)

Author keywords

Clinical guidelines; Computer assisted tools; Formal verification; Model driven development; Model transformation

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL GUIDELINE; CLINICAL PRACTICES; COMPUTER-ASSISTED TOOL; FORMAL SPECIFICATION; FORMAL VERIFICATIONS; INPUT MODELS; LOGIC STATEMENTS; MODEL CHECKER; MODEL DRIVEN APPROACH; MODEL-CHECKING TECHNIQUES; MODEL-DRIVEN DEVELOPMENT; PLUG-INS; PROPERTY SPECIFICATION; SEMANTIC ERRORS; UML STATECHARTS; VERIFICATION PROCESS;

RESEARCH; SPECIFICATIONS; TEMPORAL LOGIC;

MODEL CHECKING;

ARTICLE; AUTHORITY; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MEDICAL PRACTICE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SEMANTICS; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; STANDARDS; THEORETICAL MODEL;

DECISION MAKING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS, CLINICAL; HUMANS; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 77954144318     PISSN: 15320464     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbi.2010.02.009     Document Type: Article

References (117)

1. Institute of Medicine Guidelines for Clinical Practice: from Development to Use 1992, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
2. Papadopoulos C. The development of Canadian clinical practice guidelines: a literature review and synthesis of findings. JCCA J. Can. Chiropr. Assoc. 2003, 47(1):39-57.
3. OMG, UML 2.0 Superstructure Specification (August 2005), document formal/05-07-04. Available at Last visited: September 2009. http://www.omg.org/.
4. Selic B. The pragmatics of model-driven development. IEEE Softw. 2003, 20(5):19-25.
5. B. Pérez, I. Porres, Verification of clinical guidelines by model checking, in: Proceedings of the 21th IEEE International Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems (CBMS 2008), 2008, pp. 114-119.
6. I. Porres, E. Domínguez, B. Pérez, A. Rodríguez, M. Zapata, Development of an ubiquitous decision support system for clinical guidelines using MDA, in: Proceedings of the CAiSE'07 Forum, Trondheim, Norway, 2007.
7. I. Porres, E. Domínguez, B. Pérez, A. Rodríguez, M. Zapata, A model driven approach to automate the implementation of clinical guidelines in decision support systems, in: Proceedings of the 15th Annual IEEE International Conference and Workshop on Engineering of Computer Based Systems (ECBS 2008), 2
8. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, National guideline clearinghouse, guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections, available at Last visited: Sept. 2009. http://www.guideline.gov.
9. SEIMC Sociedad Espanola de Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiología Clínica [On-line], Documentos científicos, Available at Last visited: Sept. 2009. http://www.seimc.org/documentos/.
10. Wang D., Peleg M., Tu S., Boxwala A., Ogunyemi O., Zeng Q., et al. Design and implementation of the GLIF3 guideline execution engine. J. Biomed. Inform. 2004, 37(5):305-318.
11. Ohno-Machado L., Gennari J., Murphy S., et al. The guideline interchange format: a model for representing guidelines. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 1998, 5(4):357-372.
12. M. Balser, C. Duelli, W. Reif, Formal semantics of Asbru - an overview, in: B.K.H Ehrig, e. A Ertas (Eds.), Proc. of the 6th Biennial World Conference on Integrated Design and Process Technology (IDPT-02), Society for Design and Process Science, USA, 2002, pp. 1-8.
13. Shahar Y., Young O., Shalom E., Galperin M., Mayaffit A., Moskovitch R., et al. A framework for a distributed, hybrid, multiple-ontology clinical-guideline library, and automated guideline-support tools. J. Biomed. Inform. 2004, 37(5):325-344.
14. Young O., Shahar Y., Liel Y., Lunenfeld E., Bar G., Shalom E., et al. Runtime application of Hybrid-Asbru clinical guidelines. J. Biomed. Inform. 2007, 40(5):507-526.
15. Tu S., Musen M. Modeling data and knowledge in the EON guideline architecture. Medinfo 2001, 10(1):280-284.
16. M. Humber, H. Butterworth, J. Fox, R. Thomson, Medical decision support via the Internet: PROforma and Solo, in: Proceedings of the Tenth World Congress on Health and Medical Informatics (Medinfo2001), Vol. 10, 2001, pp. 464-469.
17. Sutton D., Fox J. The syntax and semantics of the PROforma guideline modelling language. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2003, 10(5):433-443.
18. Shiffman R., Agrawal A., Deshpande A., Gershkovich P. An approach to guideline implementation with GEM. Medinfo 2001, 10(Pt 1):271-275.
19. Shiffman R., Michel G. Toward improved guideline quality: using the COGS statement with GEM. Medinfo 2004, 11(Pt 1):159-163.
20. Terenziani P., Montani S., Bottrighi A., Torchio M., Molino G., Correndo G. A context-adaptable approach to clinical guidelines. Medinfo 2004, 11(1):169-173.
21. Terenziani P., Montani S., Bottrighi A., Torchio M., Molino G., Correndo G. The GLARE approach to clinical guidelines: main features. Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 2004, 101:162-166.
22. Peleg M., Tu S., Bury J., Ciccarese P., Fox J., et al. Comparing computer-interpretable guideline models: a case-study approach. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2002, 10(1):52-68.
23. OpenClinical, Methods and tools for representing computerised clinical guidelines, Last visited: September 2009. http://www.openclinical.org/gmmsummaries.html.
24. Wang D., Peleg M., Tu S., Boxwala A., Greenes R., Patel V., et al. process models and patient data in computer-interpretable clinical practice guidelines: a literature review of guideline representation models. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2002, 68(1-3):59-70.
25. ten Teije A., Marcos M., Balser M., van Croonenborg J., Duelli C., et al. Improving medical protocols by formal methods. Artif. Intell. Med. 2006, 36(3):193-209.
26. M. Moser, S. Miksch, Improving clinical guideline implementation through prototypical design patterns, in: S. Miksch, J. Hunter, E.K. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Medicine (AIME 2005), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3581, Springer, 2005, pp. 126-130.
27. Domínguez E., Pérez B., Rodríguez A., Zapata M. Protocolos médicos para la toma de decisiones en un contexto de computación ubicua. Novática 2005, 177:38-41.
28. J. Whittle, J. Schumann, Statechart synthesis from scenarios: an air traffic control: case study, in: Workshop on Scenarios and State Machines at ICSE2002, 2002.
29. Büssow R., Geisler R., Klar M. Specifying safety-critical embedded systems with statecharts and Z: a case study. Proc. Int. Conf. on Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering (FASE) 1998, vol. 1382:71-87. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Lisbon, Portugal.
30. Efroni S., Harel D., Cohen I. Toward rigorous comprehension of biological complexity: modeling, execution, and visualisation of thymic T-cell maturation. Genome Res. 2003, 13(11):2485-2497.
31. N. Kam, I. Cohen, D. Harel, The immune system as a reactive system: modeling T cell activation with statecharts, in: Proc. Visual Languages and Formal Methods (VLFM'01), part of IEEE Symp. on Human-Centric Computing (HCC'01), 2001, pp. 15-22.
32. Sobolev B., Harel D., Vasilakis C., Levy A. Using the statecharts paradigm for simulation of patient flow in surgical care. Health Care Manag. Sci. 2008, 11(1):7986.
33. L. Giordano, P. Terenziani, A. Bottrighi, S. Montani, L. Donzella, Model checking for clinical guidelines: an agent-based approach, in: AMIA Annu Symp Proc, 2006, pp. 289-293.
34. N. Health, M.R. Council, A guide to the development, implementation and evaluation of clinical practice guidelines, in: Canberra: NHMRC, 1998, available at Last visited: September 2009. http://www.csp.nsw.gov.au/nhmrc/downloads/pdfs/NHMRCClinicalPractice.pdf.
35. Watine J., Friedberg B., Nagy E., Onody R., Oosterhuis W., Bunting P., et al. Conflict between guideline methodologic quality and recommendation validity: a potential problem for practitioners. Clin. Chem. 2006, 52(1):65-72.
36. Balser M., Coltell O., van Croonenborg J., Duelli C., van Harmelen F., Jovell A., et al. Protocure: supporting the development of medical protocols through formal methods. Proceedings of the Workshop on Computerised Protocols and Guidelines (CGP-04) 2004, IOS Press.
37. M. Balser, J. Schmitt, W. Reif, Verification of medical guidelines with KIV, in: Proceedings of Workshop on AI Techniques in Healthcare: Evidence-based Guidelines and Protocols (ECAI-2006), 2006.
38. Hommersom A., Groot P., Lucas P., Balser M., Schmitt J. Verification of medical guidelines using background knowledge in task networks. IEEE Trans. Knowledge Data Eng. 2007, 19(6):832-846.
39. Lucas P. Quality checking of medical guidelines through logical abduction. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2003, vol. XX:309-321. Springer. F. Coenen, A. Preece, A. Mackintosh (Eds.).
40. M. Marcos, M. Balser, A. Ten Teije, F. Van Harmelen, From informal knowledge to formal logic: a realistic case study in medical protocols, in: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management (EKAW-2002), Springer-Verlag, 2002, pp. 49-64.
41. Marcos M., Balser M., ten Teije A., van Harmelen F., Duelli C. Experiences in the formalisation and verification of medical protocols. LNAI 2003, vol. 2780:132-141. Springer-Verlag.
42. Bäumler S., Balser M., Dunets A., Reif W., Schmitt J. Verification of medical guidelines by model checking - a case study. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2006, vol. 3925:219-233. Springer, Vienna, Austria.
43. Groot P., Hommersom A., Lucas P., Serban R., ten Teije A., van Harmelen F. The role of model checking in critiquing based on clinical guidelines. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2007, vol. 4594:411-420. Springer, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
44. A. Hommersom, P. Groot, P. Lucas, M. Marcos, B. Martinez-Salvador, A constraint-based approach to medical guidelines and protocols, in: ECAI 2006 Workshop - AI techniques in healthcare: evidence based guidelines and protocols, 2006, pp. 25-30.
45. P. Terenziani, L. Anselma, A. Bottrighi, L. Giordano, S. Montani, Automatic checking of the correctness of clinical guidelines in glare, in: Proceedings of the 12th World Congress on Health (Medical) Informatics - Building Sustainable Health SystemsMedInfo (MEDINFO 2007), vol. 129, 2007, pp. 807-811.
46. G. Duftschmid, Knowledge-based verification of clinical guidelines by detection of anomalies, PhD Dissertation, University of Vienna, 1999.
47. Duftschmid G., Miksch S. Knowledge-based verification of clinical guidelines by detection of anomalies. Artif. Intell. Med. 2001, 22(1):23-41.
48. SPIN and PROMELA reference manual, Available at Last visited: September 2009. http://spinroot.com.
49. Pnueli A. The temporal logic of programs. Proceedings of the 18th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS) 1977, vol. 0:46-57. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, USA.
50. Clarke E., Emerson E. Design and synthesis of synchronization skeletons using branching-time temporal logic. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1981, vol. 131:52-71. Springer.
51. Moszkowski B. A temporal logic for multilevel reasoning about hardware. Computer 1985, 18(2):10-19.
52. KIV Theorem Prover, available at Last visited: September 2009. http://www.informatik.uni-augsburg.de/lehrstuehle/swt/se/kiv/.
53. T. Uribe, Combinations of model checking and theorem proving, in: Proceedings of the Third International Workshop on Frontiers of Combining Systems (FroCoS 2000), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1794, Springer, Nancy, France, 2000, pp. 151-170.
54. V. Pantelic, X. Jin, M. Lawford, D. Parnas, Inspection of concurrent systems: combining tables, theorem proving and model checking, in: H.R. Arabnia, H. Reza (Eds.), Software Engineering Research and Practice, CSREA Press, 2006, pp. 629-635.
55. The Cadence SMV Model Checker, Available at Last visited: September 2009. http://www.kenmcmil.com/smv.html.
56. R. Cobleigh, G. Avrunin, L. Clarke, User guidance for creating precise and accessible property specifications, in: SIGSOFT '06/FSE-14: Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of software engineering, ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2006, pp. 208-218.
57. M. Dwyer, G. Avrunin, J. Corbett, Patterns in property specifications for finite-state verification, in: Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE '99), IEEE, 1999, pp. 411-420.
58. Yu J., Manh T., Han J., Jin Y., Han Y., Wang J. Pattern based property specification and verification for service composition. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2006, vol. 4255:156-168. Springer. K. Aberer (Ed.).
59. Clarke E., Jr O., Peled D. Model Checking 2001, The MIT Press, Masachusetts, Cambridge.
60. MOFScript Eclipse plug in, Available at Last visited: September 2009. http://www.eclipse.org/gmt/mofscript.
61. E. Gamma, R. Helm, R. Johnson, J. Vlissides, Design patterns: elements of reusable object-oriented software, Addison Wesley, 1995.
62. Hibernate, Relational Persistence for Java and .NET, Last visited: September 2009. http://www.hibernate.org/.
63. E. Domínguez, B. Pérez, M. Zapata, Tracing the application of clinical guidelines, in: Proceedings of the International Workshop On Health Data Management, (IWHDM 2008), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4977, Springer, 2008, pp. 122-133.
64. E. Domínguez, B. Pérez, M. Zapata, Towards a traceable clinical guidelines application: a model driven approach, Methods Inform. Med. doi:10.3414/ME09-01-0038. doi:10.3414/ME09-01-0038.
65. ATL Eclipse Plug-in, Available at Last visited: September 2009. http://www.eclipse.org/m2m/atl/.
66. OMG, OMG Model Driven Architecture (June 2003), document omg/2003-06-01. Available at Last visited: September 2009. http://www.omg.org/.
67. Borland Together 2006 Release 2 for Eclipse, Last visited: September 2009. http://www.borland.com/together.
68. E. Bouza, J.L. nares, A. Pascual, Diagnóstico microbiológico de las infecciones asociadas a catéteres intravasculares, in: R.C. e. E Cercenado (Ed.), Procedimientos en Microbiología Clínica, segunda edici=n Edition, Sociedad Espanola de Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiología Clínica, 2004, Available at Last visited: September 2009. http://www.seimc.org/documentos/protocolos/microbiologia/.
69. Leon C., Ariza J. Guías para el tratamiento de las infecciones relacionadas con catéteres intravasculares de corta permanencia en adultos: conferencia de consenso SEIMC-SEMICYUC. Enferm. Infecc. Microbiol. Clin. 2004, 22(2):92-101.
70. Society for Medical Decision Making Committee of Standardization of Clinical Algorithms Proposal for Clinical Algorithm Standards. Med. Decis. Making 1992, 12(2):149-154.
71. Baresi L., Consorti F., Di Paola M., Gargiulo A., Pezzè M. LEMMA: a language for easy medical model analysis. J. Med. Syst. 1997, 21(6):369-388.
72. E. Domínguez, A. Rubio, M. Zapata, A way of dealing with behaviour of state machines, in: Proceedings of the UML 2000 Workshop: Dynamic Behaviour in UML Models: Semantic Questions, 2000, pp. 32-37.
73. Enterprise Architect UML Case Tool, Available at Last visited: September 2009. http://www.sparxsystems.com/.
74. Gentleware, Poseidon for uml case tool, Available at Last visited: September 2009. http://www.gentleware.com/.
75. ArgoUML modeling tool, Available at Last visited: September 2009. http://argouml.tigris.org.
76. EMF-based implementation of the Unified Modeling Language (UMLTM) 2.x OMG metamodel for the Eclipse platform, The Eclipse UML2 project website, Last visited: September 2009. http://www.eclipse.org/uml2.
77. Eclipse Plugin Central (EPIC), Available at Last visited: September 2009. http://www.eclipseplugincentral.com/.
78. Eclipse plugins, Available at Last visited: September 2009. http://www.eclipse-plugins.info/.
79. modelbased.net, UML Tools, Available at Last visited: September 2009. http://www.modelbased.net/uml_tools.html.
80. modelbased.net, MDA Tools, Available at Last visited: September 2009. http://www.modelbased.net/mda_tools.html.
81. Domínguez E., Rubio A., Zapata M. Dynamic semantics of UML state machines: a metamodeling perspective. J. Database Manag. 2002, 13(4):20-38.
82. Jin Y., Esser R., Janneck J. A method for describing the syntax and semantics of UML statecharts. Softw. Syst. Model. 2004, 3(2):150-163.
83. Gnesi S., Latella D., Massink M. Model checking UML statechart diagrams using JACK. Proc. of the Fourth IEEE International Symposium on High Assurance Systems Engineering 1999, IEEE.
84. Lilius J., Porres I. vUML: a tool for verifying UML models. The 14th IEEE International Conference on Automated Software Engineering 1999, IEEE Computer Society, Cocoa Beach, Florida.
85. France R.B., Ghosh S., Dinh-Trong T., Solberg A. Model-driven development using UML 2.0: promises and pitfalls. IEEE Comput. 2006, 39(2):59-66. 10.1109/MC.2006.65.
86. Hommersom A., Lucas P., Balser M. Meta-level verification of the quality of medical guidelines using interactive theorem proving. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2004, vol. 3229:654-666. Springer.
87. M. Marcos, H. Roomans, A. ten Teije, F. van Harmelen, Improving medical protocols through formalisation: a case study, in: H. Ehrig, B. Kraemer, A. Ertas (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth World Conference on Integrate Design and Process Technology, 2002, pp. 59-64.
88. M. Marcos, G. Berger, F. van Harmelen, A. ten Teije, H. Roomans, S. Miksch, Using critiquing for improving medical protocols: harder than it seems, in: Proceedings of the 8th Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Medicine (AIME 2001), 2001, pp. 431-441.
89. M. van Gendt, A. ten Teije, R. Serban, F. van Harmelen, Formalising medical quality indicators to improve guidelines, in: S. Miksch, JHunter, E. Keravnou (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Medicine (AIME 2005), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3581, Springer, 2005, pp. 201-210.
90. K. Ryndina, Improving Requirements Engineering: An Enhanced Requirements Modelling and Analysis Method, Ph.D. thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Cape Town, master's thesis, 2005.
91. Ryndina K., Kritzinger P. Analysis of structured use case models through model checking. S. Afr. Comput. J. 2005, 35:84-96.
92. M. Dwyer, G. Avrunin, J. Corbett., Specification Patterns Website, Last visited: September 2009. http://patterns.projects.cis.ksu.edu/.
93. O. Ryndina, P. Kritzinger, Improving requirements specification for communication services with formalised use case models, in: Southern African Telecommunication Networks and Applications Conference (SATNAC 2004), Spier Wine Estate, South Africa, 2004.
94. Clarke E., Draghicescu I. Expressibility results for linear-time and branching-time logics. Linear Time, Branching Time and Partial Order in Logics and Models for Concurrency, School/Workshop 1988, 428-437. Springer-Verlag, London, UK.
95. O. Kupferman, M. Vardi, Relating linear and branching model checking, in: Proceedings of the International Conference on Programming Concepts and Methods (PROCOMET'98), 1998, pp. 304-326.
96. Laroussinie F., Markey N. Expressiveness of temporal logics. Introductory course, 18th European Summer School in Logic, Language and Information (ESSLLI'06) 2006, Malaga, Spain.
97. M. Vardi, Sometimes and not never re-revisited: on branching versus linear time, in: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Concurrency Theory (CONCUR '98), Springer-Verlag, London, UK, 1998, pp. 1-17, invited Presentation.
98. Vardi M. Branching vs. linear time: final showdown. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems (TACAS) 2001, 1-22. Springer-Verlag, London, UK.
99. Clarke E., Grumberg O., Hamaguchi K. Another look at LTL model checking. Form. Methods Syst. Des. 1997, 10(1):47-71.
100. Kong W., Seino T., Futatsugi K., Ogata K. A lightweight integration of theorem proving and model checking for system verification. Proceedings of the 12th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC) 2005, 59-66. IEEE Computer Society, Taipei, Taiwan.
101. Kripke S. Semantic analysis of modal logic. Zeitschrift fur Mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik 1963, 9:67-96.
102. T. Jussila, J. Dubrovin, T. Junttila, T. Latvala, I. Porres, Model checking dynamic and hierarchical UML state machines, in: MoDeV2a: Model Development, Validation and Verification; 3rd International Workshop, Genova, Italy, October 2006, 2006, pp. 94-110.
103. A. Knapp, S. Merz, Model checking and code generation for UML state machines and collaborations, in: G. Schellhorn, W. Reif (Eds.), FM-TOOLS 2002: 5th Workshop on Tools for System Design and Verification, Report 2002-11, Institut für Informatik, Universität Augsburg, Reisensburg, Germany, 2002.
104. E. Mikk, Semantics and Verification of Statecharts, PhD Dissertation, University of Kiel, 2000.
105. I. Porres, Modeling and Analyzing Software Behavior in UML, Ph.D. thesis, Åbo Akademi, Finland, 2001.
106. J. Oldevik, MOFScript eclipse plug-in: metamodel-based code generation, in: Proceedings of the Eclipse Technology eXchange workshop (eTX) at the ECOOP 2006 Conference, Nantes, France, 2006.
107. MODELWARE project., Modelling solution for software systems, Available at Last visited: September 2009. http://www.modelware-ist.org/.
108. Eclipse Generative Modeling Tools (GMT), Available at Last visited: September 2009. http://www.eclipse.org/gmt.
109. OMG, Mofscript Second Revised Submission to the MOF Model to Text Transformation RFP, OMG document ad/2005-11-03, Available at Last visited: September 2009. http://www.omg.org/.
110. EMF, The Eclipse Modeling Framework website, Last visited: September 2009. http://www.eclipse.org/emf.
111. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, National Guideline Clearinghouse, Available at Last visited: September 2009. http://www.guideline.gov.
112. Peleg M., Patel V., Snow V., et al. Support for guideline development through error classification and constraint checking. Proc. AMIA Fall Symp. 2002, 607-611.
113. Shalom E., Shahar Y., Taieb-Maimon M., Bar G., Yarkoni A., et al. A quantitative assessment of a methodology for collaborative specification and evaluation of clinical guidelines. J. Biomed. Informat. 2008, 41(6):889-903.
114. Shahar Y., Miksch S., Johnson P. The Asgaard project: a task-specific framework for the application and critiquing of time-oriented clinical guidelines. Artif. Intell. Med. 1998, 14(1-2):29-51.
115. Fox J., Johns N., Rahmanzadeh A. Disseminating medical knowledge: the PROforma approach. Artif. Intell. Med. 1998, 14:157-181.
116. Kaiser K., Akkaya C., Miksch S. How can information extraction ease formalizing treatment processes in clinical practice guidelines?: a method and its evaluation. Artif. Intell. Med. 2007, 39(2):151-163.
117. Kaiser K., Miksch S. Versioning computer-interpretable guidelines: semi-automatic modeling of 'Living Guidelines' using an information extraction method. Artif. Intell. Med. 2009, 46(1):55-66.