Comprehensive mitigation framework for concurrent application of multiple clinical practice guidelines

Journal of Biomedical Informatics

Volumn 66, Issue , 2017, Pages 52-71

  Wilk, Szymon ^a,b   Michalowski, Martin ^c   Michalowski, Wojtek ^b   Rosu, Daniela ^b   Carrier, Marc ^d   Kezadri Hamiaz, Mounira ^b  

^a POZNAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Poland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^c Adventium Labs   (United States)

^d OTTAWA HOSPITAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

Author keywords

Adverse interaction mitigation; Clinical practice guidelines; First order logic; Multi morbidity; Patient preferences

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; COMPUTER CIRCUITS; DECISION MAKING; DISEASES; FORMAL LOGIC; PATIENT TREATMENT;

ADVERSE INTERACTION MITIGATION; CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES; FIRST ORDER LOGIC; MULTI-MORBIDITY; PATIENT PREFERENCES;

DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; ATRIAL FIBRILLATION; CASE STUDY; CHRONIC KIDNEY FAILURE; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; COMBINED MITIGATION THEORY; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; CUSTOMIZE PROCEDURE; ESTIMATED GLOMERULAR FILTRATION RATE; FIRST ORDER LOGIC; HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT; HUMAN; HYPERTENSION; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MITIGATE PROCEDURE; MITIGATION FRAMEWORK; PATIENT INFORMATION; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVISION OPERATOR; THEORY; CHRONIC DISEASE;

ALGORITHMS; CHRONIC DISEASE; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS, CLINICAL; HUMANS; HYPERTENSION; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC;

EID: 85007453235     PISSN: 15320464     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbi.2016.12.002     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. [1] Institute of Medicine, Clinical Practice Guidelines: Directions for a New Program. 1990, National Academy Press.
2. [2] Latoszek-Berendsen, A., Tange, H., van den Herik, H.J., Hasman, A., From clinical practice guidelines to computer-interpretable guidelines. A literature overview. Methods Inform. Med. 49:6 (2010), 550–570.
3. [3] Peleg, M., Computer-interpretable clinical guidelines: a methodological review. J. Biomed. Inform. 46:4 (2013), 744–763.
4. [4] Shiffman, R.N., Karras, B.T., Agrawal, A., Chen, R., Marenco, L., Nath, S., GEM: a proposal for a more comprehensive guideline document model using XML. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 7:5 (2000), 488–498.
5. [5] Shekelle, P., Woolf, S., Grimshaw, J.M., Schunemann, H.J., Eccles, M.P., Developing clinical practice guidelines: reviewing, reporting, and publishing guidelines; updating guidelines; and the emerging issues of enhancing guideline implementability and accounting for comorbid conditions in guideline development. Implement. Sci., 7, 2012, 62.
6. [6] Piette, J.D., Kerr, E.A., The impact of comorbid chronic conditions on diabetes care. Diabetes Care 29 (2006), 725–731.
7. [7] Boyd, C.M., Weiss, C.O., Halter, J., Han, K.C., Ershler, W.B., Fried, L.P., Framework for evaluating disease severity measures in older adults with comorbidity. J. Gerontol. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci. 62 (2007), 286–295.
8. [8] Wilk, S., Michalowski, W., Michalowski, M., Farion, K., Hing, M., Mohapatra, S., Automatic mitigation of adverse interactions in pairs of clinical practice guidelines using constraint logic programming. J. Biomed. Inform. 46:2 (2013), 341–353.
9. [9] Wilk, S., Michalowski, M., Tan, X., Michalowski, W., Using first-order logic to represent clinical practice guidelines and to mitigate adverse interactions. Miksch, S., Riaǹo, D., ten Teije, A., (eds.) Knowledge Representation for Health Care, 6th International Workshop, KR4HC 2014, held as Part of the Vienna Summer of Logic, VSL 2014, Vienna, Austria, July 21, 2014, Revised Selected Papers, 2014, Springer, 45–61.
10. [10] Michalowski, M., Wilk, S., Tan, X., Michalowski, W., First-order logic theory for manipulating clinical practice guidelines applied to comorbid patients: a case study. AMIA Annu. Symp. Proc., 2014, 892–898.
11. [11] Hing, M., Michalowski, M., Wilk, S., Michalowski, W., Farion, K., Identifying inconsistencies in multiple clinical practice guidelines for a patient with co-morbidity. Proceedings of KEDDH-10, 2010, IEEE, 447–452.
12. [12] Ohno-Machado, L., Gennari, J.H., Murphy, S.N., Jain, N.L., Tu, S.W., Oliver, D.E., Pattison-Gordon, E., Greenes, R.A., Shortliffe, E.H., Barnett, G.O., The guideline interchange format: a model for representing guidelines. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 5:4 (1998), 357–372.
13. [13] Bottrighi, A., Rubrichi, S., Terenziani, P., META-GLARE: a meta-engine for executing computer interpretable guidelines. Riaño, D., Lenz, R., Miksch, S., Peleg, M., Reichert, M., ten Teije, A., (eds.) Knowledge Representation for Health Care: AIME 2015 International Joint Workshop, KR4HC/ProHealth 2015 Pavia, Italy, June 20, 2015, Revised Selected Papers, 2015, Springer, 37–50.
14. [14] Sutton, D.R., Fox, J., The syntax and semantics of the PROforma guideline modeling language. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 10:5 (2003), 433–443.
15. [15] 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. 14:1–2 (1998), 29–51.
16. [16] M. Musen, M.K. Goldstein, S. Tu, S. Martins, C. Nyulas, H. Jung, P. Kum, GLINDA: GuideLine INteraction Detection Architecture. < http://glinda-project.stanford.edu/>, 2011.
17. [17] Jafarpour, B., Abidi, S.S.R., Merging disease-specific clinical guidelines to handle comorbidities in a clinical decision support setting. Peek, N., Morales, R., Peleg, M., (eds.) Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, 14th Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, AIME 2013, Murcia, Spain, May 29–June 1, 2013, Proceedings, 2013, Springer, 28–32.
18. [18] Riaǹo, D., Collado, A., Model-based combination of treatments for the management of chronic comorbid patients. Peek, N., Morales, R., Peleg, M., (eds.) Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, 14th Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, AIME 2013, Murcia, Spain, May 29–June 1, 2013, Proceedings, 2013, Springer, 11–16.
19. [19] Piovesan, L., Terenziani, P., A mixed-initiative approach to the conciliation of clinical guidelines for comorbid patients. Riaño, D., Lenz, R., Miksch, S., Peleg, M., Reichert, M., ten Teije, A., (eds.) Knowledge Representation for Health Care: AIME 2015 International Joint Workshop, KR4HC/ProHealth 2015, Pavia, Italy, June 20, 2015, Revised Selected Papers, 2015, Springer, 95–108.
20. [20] Zhang, Y., Zhang, Z., Preliminary result on finding treatments for patients with comorbidity. Miksch, S., Riaǹo, D., ten Teije, A., (eds.) Knowledge Representation for Health Care, 6th International Workshop, KR4HC 2014, held as Part of the Vienna Summer of Logic, VSL 2014, Vienna, Austria, July 21, 2014, Revised Selected Papers, 2014, Springer, 14–28.
21. [21] Zamborlini, V., da Silveira, M., Pruski, C., ten Teije, A., van Harmelen, F., Towards a conceptual model for enhancing reasoning about clinical guidelines. Miksch, S., Riańo, D., ten Teije, A., (eds.) Knowledge Representation for Health Care, 6th International Workshop, KR4HC 2014, held as Part of the Vienna Summer of Logic, VSL 2014, Vienna, Austria, July 21, 2014, Revised Selected Papers, 2014, Springer, 29–44.
22. [22] Zamborlini, V., Hoekstra, R., da Silveira, M., Pruski, C., ten Teije, A., van Harmelen, F., Inferring recommendation interactions in clinical guidelines: case-studies on multimorbidity. Semantic Web J. 7:4 (2016), 447–461.
23. [23] Zamborlini, V., Hoekstra, R., da Silveira, M., Pruski, C., ten Teije, A., van Harmelen, F., Generalizing the detection of internal and external interactions in clinical guidelines. Proceedings of the 9th International Joint Conference on Biomedical Engineering Systems and Technologies, 2016, SCITEPRESS, 105–116.
24. [24] Sánchez-Garzón, I., Fdez-Olivares, J., Onaindía, E., Milla, G., Jordán, J., Castejón, P., A multi-agent planning approach for the generation of personalized treatment plans of comorbid patients. Peek, N., Marín Morales, R., Peleg, M., (eds.) Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: 14th Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, AIME 2013, Murcia, Spain, May 29–June 1, 2013, Proceedings, 2013, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 23–27.
25. [25] Montori, V., Devereaux, P., Straus, S., Haynes, B., Guyatt, G., Decision making and the patient. Guyatt, G., Rennie, D., Meade, M., Cook, D., (eds.) User's Guide to the Medical Literature: A Manual for Evidence-based Clinical Practice, 2008, McGraw-Hill Professional, 643–662 (Chapter 22.2).
26. [26] Klose, K., Kreimeier, S., Tangermann, U., Aumann, I., Damm, K., Patient- and person-reports on healthcare: preferences, outcomes, experiences, and satisfaction – an essay. Health Econ. Rev., 6(1), 2015, 18.
27. [27] Say, R.E., Thomson, R., The importance of patient preferences in treatment decisions – challenges for doctors. BMJ 327:7414 (2003), 542–545.
28. [28] van der Weijden, T., Légaré, F., Boivin, A., Burgers, J.S., van Veenendaal, H., Stiggelbout, A.M., Faber, M., Elwyn, G., How to integrate individual patient values and preferences in clinical practice guidelines? A research protocol. Implement. Sci., 5, 2010, 10.
29. [29] Montori, V.M., Brito, J.P., Murad, M.H., The optimal practice of evidence-based medicine: incorporating patient preferences in practice guidelines. JAMA 310:23 (2013), 2503–2504.
30. [30] Sacristán, J., Patient-centered medicine and patient-oriented research: improving health outcomes for individual patients. BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Mak., 13, 2013, 6.
31. [31] Brennan, P., Strombom, I., Improving health care by understanding patient preferences: the role of computer technology. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 5:3 (1998), 257–262.
32. [32] Sacchi, L., Rognoni, C., Rubrichi, S., Panzarasa, S., Quaglini, S., From decision to shared-decision: introducing patients’ preferences in clinical decision analysis – a case study in thromboembolic risk prevention. Peek, N., Marín Morales, R., Peleg, M., (eds.) Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: 14th Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, AIME 2013, Murcia, Spain, May 29–June 1, 2013, Proceedings, 2013, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1–10.
33. [33] García-Sáez, G., Rigla, M., Martínez-Sarriegui, I., Shalom, E., Peleg, M., Broens, T., Pons, B., Caballero-Ruíz, E., Gómez, E.J., Hernando, M.E., Patient-oriented computerized clinical guidelines for mobile decision support in gestational diabetes. J. Diabetes Sci. Technol. 8:2 (2014), 238–246.
34. [34] Rautenberg, W., A Concise Introduction to Mathematical Logic. 2010, Springer.
35. [35] Pavlov, V., Schukin, A., Cherkasova, T., Exploring automated reasoning in first-order logic: tools, techniques and application areas. Klinov, P., Mouromstev, D., (eds.) Knowledge Engineering and the Semantic Web, 4th International Conference, KESW 2013, St. Petersburg, Russia, October 7–9, 2013, Proceedings, 2013, Springer, 102–116.
36. [36] Zhang, H., Zhang, J., A comparison of finite model generators. Bonacina, M.P., Stickel, M.E., (eds.) Automated Reasoning and Mathematics, Essays in Memory of William W. McCune, 2013, Springer, 101–130.
37. [37] Shivade, C., Malewadkar, P., Fosler-Lussier, E., Lai, A.M., Comparison of UMLS terminologies to identify risk of heart disease using clinical notes. J. Biomed. Inform. 58:Supplement (2015), S103–S110 (Proceedings of the 2014 i2b2/UTHealth Shared-Tasks and Workshop on Challenges in Natural Language Processing for Clinical Data).
38. [38] Carroll, R.J., Thompson, W.K., Eyler, A.E., Mandelin, A.M., Cai, T., Zink, R.M., Pacheco, J.A., Boomershine, C.S., Lasko, T.A., Xu, H., Karlson, E.W., Perez, R.G., Gainer, V.S., Murphy, S.N., Ruderman, E.M., Pope, R.M., Plenge, R.M., Kho, A.N., Liao, K.P., Denny, J.C., Portability of an algorithm to identify rheumatoid arthritis in electronic health records. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 19:e1 (2012), e162–e169.
39. [39] Allen, J., Maintaining knowledge about temporal intervals. Commun. ACM 26:11 (1983), 832–843.
40. [40] Migliore, M., Martorana, V., Sciortino, F., An algorithm to find all paths between two nodes in a graph. J. Comput. Phys. 87:1 (1990), 231–236.
41. [41] Gospodarowicz, M., O'Sullivan, B., Patient management scenario: a framework for clinical decision and prognosis. Semin. Surg. Oncol. 21:1 (2003), 8–12.
42. [42] Stone, H.S., Sipala, P., The average complexity of depth-first search with backtracking and cutoff. IBM J. Res. Dev. 30:3 (1986), 242–258.
43. [43] BCGuidelines.ca, Chronic Kidney Disease – Identification, Evaluation and Management of Adult Patients, Ministry of Health, British Columbia, 2014.
44. [44] Michalowski, M., Wilk, S., Rosu, D., Kezadri, M., Michalowski, W., Carrier, M., Expanding a first-order logic mitigation framework to handle multimorbid patient preferences. AMIA Annu. Symp. Proc., 2015, 895–904.
45. [45] Anselma, L., Piovesan, L., Terenziani, P., Temporal detection of guideline interactions. Proceedings of the International Conference on Health Informatics (HEALTHINF-2015), 2015, Scitepress, 40–50.
46. [46] Somekh, J., Peleg, M., Eran, A., Koren, I., Feiglin, A., Demishtein, A., Shiloh, R., Heiner, M., Kong, S.W., Elazar, Z., Kohane, I., A model-driven methodology for exploring complex disease comorbidities applied to autism spectrum disorder and inflammatory bowel disease. J. Biomed. Inform. 63 (2016), 366–378.
47. [47] de Moura, L., Bjørner, N., Z3: an efficient SMT solver. Ramakrishnan, C.R., Rehof, J., (eds.) Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems: 14th International Conference, TACAS 2008, Held as Part of the Joint European Conferences on Theory and Practice of Software, ETAPS 2008, Budapest, Hungary, March 29-April 6, 2008, Proceedings, 2008, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 337–340.
48. [48] Halpern, J.Y., Vardi, M.Y., Artificial Intelligence and Mathematical Theory of Computation (Papers in Honor of John McCarthy). 1991, Academic Press (Chapter Model Checking vs. Theorem Proving: A Manifesto, pp. 151–176).
49. [49] Grant, J., Hunter, A., Analysing inconsistent first-order knowledgebases. Artif. Intell. 172:8–9 (2008), 1064–1093.
50. [50] Wilk, S., Michalowski, W., O'Sullivan, D., Farion, K., Sayyad-Shirabad, J., Kuziemsky, C., Kukawka, B., A task-based support architecture for developing point-of-care clinical decision support systems for the emergency department. Methods Inform. Med. 52:1 (2013), 18–32.
51. [51] Wilk, S., Kezadri-Hamiaz, M., Rosu, D., Kuziemsky, C., Michalowski, W., Amyot, D., Carrier, M., Using semantic components to represent dynamics of an interdisciplinary healthcare team in a multi-agent decision support system. J. Med. Syst., 40(2), 2016, 42.