Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27089305›Full record

ArticleComputers in biology and medicine2016

Data-mining to build a knowledge representation store for clinical decision support. Studies on curation and validation based on machine performance in multiple choice medical licensing examinations.

Barry Robson, Srinidhi Boray

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Computers in biology and medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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.

Barry RobsonIngine Inc., DE, USA; The Dirac Foundation clg, Oxfordshire, UK; St. Matthew's University School of Medicine, Cayman Islands. Electronic address: robsonb@aol.com.
Srinidhi BorayIngine Inc., DE, USA; The Dirac Foundation clg, Oxfordshire, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Extracting medical knowledge by structured data mining of many medical records and from unstructured data mining of natural language source text on the Internet will become increasingly important for clinical decision support. Output from these sources can be transformed into large numbers of elements of knowledge in a Knowledge Representation Store (KRS), here using the notation and to some extent the algebraic principles of the Q-UEL Web-based universal exchange and inference language described previously, rooted in Dirac notation from quantum mechanics and linguistic theory. In a KRS, semantic structures or statements about the world of interest to medicine are analogous to natural language sentences seen as formed from noun phrases separated by verbs, prepositions and other descriptions of relationships. A convenient method of testing and better curating these elements of knowledge is by having the computer use them to take the test of a multiple choice medical licensing examination. It is a venture which perhaps tells us almost as much about the reasoning of students and examiners as it does about the requirements for Artificial Intelligence as employed in clinical decision making. It emphasizes the role of context and of contextual probabilities as opposed to the more familiar intrinsic probabilities, and of a preliminary form of logic that we call presyllogistic reasoning.

Indexed as

Decision Support Systems, ClinicalLicensure, MedicalData CurationData MiningHumansClinical decision supportData miningKnowledge representationMedical licensing examinationsNatural language processingProbabilityRelevanceUSMLEWeb surfing

Identifiers

PMID27089305
PMCPMC7094475

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.