ArticleArtificial intelligence in medicine2018
Evolution of the Arden Syntax: Key Technical Issues from the Standards Development Organization Perspective.
Article in Artificial intelligence in medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Contemporary clinical decision support standards using Health Level Seven International Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021Review
- A Comparison of Arden Syntax and Clinical Quality Language as Knowledge Representation Formalisms for Clinical Decision Support.Applied clinical informatics · 2021Article
- Mapping the Entire Record-An Alternative Approach to Data Access from Medical Logic Modules.Applied clinical informatics · 2020Article
- Advances in Clinical Decision Support: Highlights of Practice and the Literature 2015-2016.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2017Review
- Review
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
Abstract
backgroundThe initial version of the Arden Syntax for Medical Logic Systems was created to facilitate explicit representation of medical logic in a form that could be easily composed and interpreted by clinical experts in order to facilitate clinical decision support (CDS). Because of demand from knowledge engineers and programmers to improve functionality related to complex use cases, the Arden Syntax evolved to include features typical of general programming languages but that were specialized to meet the needs of the clinical decision support environment, including integration into a clinical information system architecture.
methodReview of the design history and evolution of the Arden Syntax by workers who participated in this evolution from the perspective of the standards development organization (SDO).
resultsIn order to meet user needs, a variety of features were successively incorporated in Arden Syntax. These can be grouped in several classes of change, including control flow, data structures, operators and external links. These changes included expansion of operators to manipulate lists and strings; a formalism for structured output; iteration constructs; user-defined objects and operators to manipulate them; features to support international use and output in different natural languages; additional control features; fuzzy logic formalisms; and mapping of the entire syntax to XML. The history and rationale of this evolution are summarized.
conclusionIn response to user demand and to reflect its growing role in clinical decision support, the Arden Syntax has evolved to include a number of powerful features. These depart somewhat from the original vision of the syntax as simple and easily understandable but from the SDO perspective increase the utility of this standard for implementation of CDS. Backwards compatibility has been maintained, allowing continued support of the earlier, simpler decision support models.
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.