ArticleStudies in health technology and informatics2014
Towards a semantic PACS: Using Semantic Web technology to represent imaging data.
Article in Studies in health technology and informatics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Ontologies for Liver Diseases Representation: A Systematic Literature Review.Journal of digital imaging · 2020Pooled it
- MI-Common Data Model: Extending Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership-Common Data Model (OMOP-CDM) for Registering Medical Imaging Metadata and Subsequent Curation Processes.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2023Article
- Position of the AI for Health Imaging (AI4HI) network on metadata models for imaging biobanks.European radiology experimental · 2022Article
- FAIR-compliant clinical, radiomics and DICOM metadata of RIDER, interobserver, Lung1 and head-Neck1 TCIA collections.Medical physics · 2020Article
- A semantic database for integrated management of image and dosimetric data in low radiation dose research in medical imaging.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2020Article
- Multicenter CT phantoms public dataset for radiomics reproducibility tests.Medical physics · 2019Article
- Assessing the practice of biomedical ontology evaluation: Gaps and opportunities.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2018Review
- Towards a semantic PACS: Using Semantic Web technology to represent imaging data.Studies in health technology and informatics · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The DICOM standard is ubiquitous within medicine. However, improved DICOM semantics would significantly enhance search operations. Furthermore, databases of current PACS systems are not flexible enough for the demands within image analysis research. In this paper, we investigated if we can use Semantic Web technology, to store and represent metadata of DICOM image files, as well as linking additional computational results to image metadata. Therefore, we developed a proof of concept containing two applications: one to store commonly used DICOM metadata in an RDF repository, and one to calculate imaging biomarkers based on DICOM images, and store the biomarker values in an RDF repository. This enabled us to search for all patients with a gross tumor volume calculated to be larger than 50 cc. We have shown that we can successfully store the DICOM metadata in an RDF repository and are refining our proof of concept with regards to volume naming, value representation, and the applications themselves.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25160167PMC5119276What 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.