Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24363318›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA

A multi-part matching strategy for mapping LOINC with laboratory terminologies.

Li-Hui Lee, Anika Groß, Michael Hartung, Der-Ming Liou, Erhard Rahm

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA. 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. Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes (LOINCDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Using UMLS for electronic health data standardization and database design.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020
    Article
  5. UMLS to DBPedia link discovery through circular resolution.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2018
    Article
  6. Trends in biomedical informatics: automated topic analysis of JAMIA articles.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2015
    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

5 authors.

Li-Hui LeeDepartment of Computer Science, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany Institute of Public Health, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Anika GroßDepartment of Computer Science, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany Interdisciplinary Center for Bioinformatics, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Michael HartungDepartment of Computer Science, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany Interdisciplinary Center for Bioinformatics, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Der-Ming LiouInstitute of Biomedical Informatics, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Erhard RahmDepartment of Computer Science, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany Interdisciplinary Center for Bioinformatics, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo address the problem of mapping local laboratory terminologies to Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes (LOINC). To study different ontology matching algorithms and investigate how the probability of term combinations in LOINC helps to increase match quality and reduce manual effort. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe proposed two matching strategies: full name and multi-part. The multi-part approach also considers the occurrence probability of combined concept parts. It can further recommend possible combinations of concept parts to allow more local terms to be mapped. Three real-world laboratory databases from Taiwanese hospitals were used to validate the proposed strategies with respect to different quality measures and execution run time. A comparison with the commonly used tool, Regenstrief LOINC Mapping Assistant (RELMA) Lab Auto Mapper (LAM), was also carried out.

resultsThe new multi-part strategy yields the best match quality, with F-measure values between 89% and 96%. It can automatically match 70-85% of the laboratory terminologies to LOINC. The recommendation step can further propose mapping to (proposed) LOINC concepts for 9-20% of the local terminology concepts. On average, 91% of the local terminology concepts can be correctly mapped to existing or newly proposed LOINC concepts.

conclusionsThe mapping quality of the multi-part strategy is significantly better than that of LAM. It enables domain experts to perform LOINC matching with little manual work. The probability of term combinations proved to be a valuable strategy for increasing the quality of match results, providing recommendations for proposed LOINC conepts, and decreasing the run time for match processing.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsLaboratoriesLogical Observation Identifiers Names and CodesTerminology as TopicHumansNatural Language ProcessingVocabulary, ControlledLOINCOntology MatchingPre-coordinationProbabilityTranslation

Identifiers

PMID24363318
PMCPMC4147612

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.