Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23304386›Full record

ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2012

Quality assurance in LOINC using Description Logic.

Tomasz Adamusiak, Olivier Bodenreider

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Tomasz AdamusiakNational Library of Medicine, 8600 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20894, USA. tadamusiak@mcw.edu
Olivier Bodenreider

Funding

National Biomedical Information ServicesZIHLM200888 · NLM · NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE · PI PALTOO, DINA · 2009 to 2025
$5200.7M
Intramural NIH HHS Z99 LM999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess whether errors can be found in LOINC by changing its representation to OWL DL and comparing its classification to that of SNOMED CT.

methodsWe created Description Logic definitions for LOINC concepts in OWL and merged the ontology with SNOMED CT to enrich the relatively flat hierarchy of LOINC parts. LOINC - SNOMED CT mappings were acquired through UMLS. The resulting ontology was classified with the ConDOR reasoner.

resultsTransformation into DL helped to identify 427 sets of logically equivalent LOINC codes, 676 sets of logically equivalent LOINC parts, and 239 inconsistencies in LOINC multiaxial hierarchy. Automatic classification of LOINC and SNOMED CT combined increased the connectivity within LOINC hierarchy and increased its coverage by an additional 9,006 LOINC codes.

conclusionsLOINC is a well-maintained terminology. While only a relatively small number of logical inconsistencies were found, we identified a number of areas where LOINC could benefit from the application of Description Logic.

Indexed as

Logical Observation Identifiers Names and CodesProgramming LanguagesQuality ControlSystematized Nomenclature of MedicineUnified Medical Language System

Identifiers

PMID23304386
PMCPMC3540427

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.