ArticleJournal of medical systems2016
Analysis of the process of representing clinical statements for decision-support applications: a comparison of openEHR archetypes and HL7 virtual medical record.
Article in Journal of medical systems, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Structure of Health Information With Different Information Models: Evaluation Study With Competency Questions.JMIR medical informatics · 2023Article
- Advances in Sharing Multi-sourced Health Data on Decision Support Science 2016-2017.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2018Review
- Applying openEHR's Guideline Definition Language to the SITS international stroke treatment registry: a European retrospective observational study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2017Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Delivering patient-specific decision-support based on computer-interpretable guidelines (CIGs) requires mapping CIG clinical statements (data items, clinical recommendations) into patients' data. This is most effectively done via intermediate data schemas, which enable querying the data according to the semantics of a shared standard intermediate schema. This study aims to evaluate the use of HL7 virtual medical record (vMR) and openEHR archetypes as intermediate schemas for capturing clinical statements from CIGs that are mappable to electronic health records (EHRs) containing patient data and patient-specific recommendations. Using qualitative research methods, we analyzed the encoding of ten representative clinical statements taken from two CIGs used in real decision-support systems into two health information models (openEHR archetypes and HL7 vMR instances) by four experienced informaticians. Discussion among the modelers about each case study example greatly increased our understanding of the capabilities of these standards, which we share in this educational paper. Differing in content and structure, the openEHR archetypes were found to contain a greater level of representational detail and structure while the vMR representations took fewer steps to complete. The use of openEHR in the encoding of CIG clinical statements could potentially facilitate applications other than decision-support, including intelligent data analysis and integration of additional properties of data items from existing EHRs. On the other hand, due to their smaller size and fewer details, the use of vMR potentially supports quicker mapping of EHR data into clinical statements.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27209183What 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.