ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2011
Can SNOMED CT fulfill the vision of a compositional terminology? Analyzing the use case for problem list.
Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Semantics in action: a guide for representing clinical data elements with SNOMED CT.Journal of biomedical semantics · 2025Article
- A State-of-the Art Review of SNOMED CT Terminology Binding and Recommendations for Practice and Research.Methods of information in medicine · 2021Article
- Automating the Transformation of Free-Text Clinical Problems into SNOMED CT Expressions.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2020Article
- Is the problem list in the eye of the beholder? An exploration of consistency across physicians.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2016Article
- An exploration of the properties of the CORE problem list subset and how it facilitates the implementation of SNOMED CT.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2015Article
- A comparative analysis of the density of the SNOMED CT conceptual content for semantic harmonization.Artificial intelligence in medicine · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We analyzed 598 of 63,952 terms employed in problem list entries from seven major healthcare institutions that were not mapped with UMLS to SNOMED CT when preparing the NLM UMLS-CORE problem list subset. We intended to determine whether published or post-coordinated SNOMED concepts could accurately capture the problems as stated by the clinician and to characterize the workload for the local terminology manager. From the terms we analyzed, we estimate that 7.5% of the total terms represent ambiguous statements that require clarification. Of those terms which were unambiguous, we estimate that 38.1% could be encoded using the SNOMED CT January 2011 pre-coordinated (published core) content. 60.4% of unambiguous terms required post-coordination to capture the term meaning within the SNOMED model. Approximately 28.5% of post-coordinated content could not be fully defined and required primitive forms. This left 1.5% of unambiguous terms which were expressed with meaning which could not be represented in SNOMED CT. We estimate from our study that 98.5% of clinical terms unambiguously suggested for the problem list can be equated to published concepts or can be modeled with SNOMED CT but that roughly one in four SNOMED modeled expressions fail to represent the full meaning of the term. Implications for the business model of the local terminology manager and the development of SNOMED CT are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22195069PMC3243203What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.