Annotating evidence based clinical guidelines: A lightweight ontology

CEUR Workshop Proceedings

Volumn 952, Issue , 2012, Pages

  Hoekstra, Rinke ^a,b   De Waard, Anita ^c   Vdovjak, Richard ^d  

^a VU UNIVERSITY AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^c ELSEVIER MASSON   (France)

^d PHILIPS RESEARCH LABORATORIES   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Annotation; Clinical decision support; Clinical guideline; Evidence based; Linked data; RDF

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS; SOCIAL NETWORKING (ONLINE); WORLD WIDE WEB;

ANNOTATION; CLINICAL DECISION SUPPORT; CLINICAL GUIDELINE; EVIDENCE-BASED; LINKED DATUM; RDF;

SEMANTIC WEB;

EID: 84922749594     PISSN: 16130073     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (14)

1. de Waard, A., Shum, S.B., Carusi, A., Park, J., Samwald, M., Sándor, Á.: Hypotheses, evidence and relationships: The hyper approach for representing scientific knowledge claims. In: Proceedings of the 8th ISWC, Workshop on Semantic Web Applications in Scientific Discourse, Berlin, Springer (October 2009)
2. Annette ten Teije, Silvia Miksch, P.L., ed.: Computer-based Medical Guidelines and Protocols: A Primer and Current Trends. Volume 139 of Technology and Informatics. (2008)
3. Seyfang, A., et al.: Maintaining formal models of living guidelines efficiently. In Bellazzi, R., Abu-Hanna, A., Hunter, J., eds.: Artificial Intelligence in Medicine. Volume 4594 of LNCS. Springer (2007) 441-445
4. Peleg, M., et al.: Comparing computer-interpretable guideline models: A case-study approach. J. Am. Med Inform Assoc. 10(1) (2003) 52-68
5. Freifeld, A.G., et al.: Clinical practice guideline for the use of antimicrobial agents in neutropenic patients with cancer: 2010 update by the infectious diseases society of america. Clinical Infectious Diseases 52(4) (2010) 56-93
6. Hoekstra, R., Magliacane, S., Rietveld, L., de Vries, G., Wibisono, A.: Hubble: Linked data hub for clinical decision support. In: Post-Conference Proceedings of the ESWC 2012. (2012)
7. Lohr, K.N.: Rating the strength of scientific evidence: relevance for quality improvement programs. International Journal for Quality in Health Care 16(1) (2003) 9-18
8. West, S., King, V., Cary, T., Lohr, K., McKoy, N., Sutton, S., Lux, L.: Systems to rate the strength of scientific evidence. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment 47, Research Triangle Institute - University of North Carolina, North Carolina (April 2002)
9. Shah, N., Bhatia, N., Jonquet, C., Rubin, D., Chiang, A., Musen, M.: Comparison of concept recognizers for building the open biomedical annotator. BMC Bioinformatics (S14) (2009)
10. Ciccarese, P., Ocana, M., Clark, T.: DOMEO: a web-based tool for semantic annotation of online documents. In: Proceedings of Bio-Ontologies, Vienna, Austria (2011)
11. Attwood, T.K., Kell, D.B., McDermott, P., Marsh, J., Pettifer, S.R., Thorne, D.: Calling international rescue: knowledge lost in literature and data landslide! Biochemical Journal 424(3) (Dec 2009) 317-333
12. Stenetorp, P., Pyysalo, S., Topić, G., Ohta, T., Ananiadou, S., Tsujii, J.: brat: a web-based tool for nlp-assisted text annotation. In: Proceedings of the Demonstrations Session at EACL 2012. (2012)
13. Grassi, M., Morbidoni, C., Nucci, M., Fonda, S., Ledda, G.: Pundit: Semantically structured annotations for web contents and digital libraries
14. Groth, P., Gibson, A., Velterop, J.: The anatomy of a nanopublication. Information Services and Use 30(1-2) (2010) 51-56