ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA
A multi-part matching strategy for mapping LOINC with laboratory terminologies.
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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Necessity of Interoperability to Uncover the Full Potential of Digital Health Devices.JMIR medical informatics · 2023Article
- Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes (LOINCDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Aligning an interface terminology to the Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes (LOINCJAMIA open · 2021Article
- Using UMLS for electronic health data standardization and database design.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020Article
- UMLS to DBPedia link discovery through circular resolution.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2018Article
- Trends in biomedical informatics: automated topic analysis of JAMIA articles.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2015Article
- Identifying the Clinical Laboratory Tests from Unspecified "Other Lab Test" Data for Secondary Use.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
What 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.