Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30537959›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2018

Evaluating lexical similarity and modeling discrepancies in the procedure hierarchy of SNOMED CT.

Ankur Agrawal

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Identifying Missing IS-A Relations in Orphanet Rare Disease Ontology.Proceedings. IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedicine · 2022
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Automated Identification of Missing IS-A Relations in the Human Phenotype Ontology.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2022
    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

1 author.

Ankur AgrawalDepartment of Computer Science, Manhattan College, New York, NY, USA. ankur@manhattan.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSNOMED CT is a standardized and comprehensive clinical terminology that is used in Electronic Health Records to capture, store and access clinical data of patients. Studies have, however, shown that there are inconsistencies inherent in the modeling of concepts in SNOMED CT that can have an impact on its usage to record clinical data and in clinical decision-making tools.

methodsAn effective lexical approach to identifying inconsistencies with high likelihood in the structural modeling of the concepts of SNOMED CT is discussed and assessed. The approach uses the two or more concepts in the context of their lexical similarity to compare their modeling in order to identify inconsistencies. A sample of 50 sets is randomly picked from the Procedure hierarchy of SNOMED CT and evaluated for inconsistencies.

resultsOf the 50 randomly picked sets, 58% are found to exhibit one or more concepts with inconsistencies. In terms of concepts, 29% of the 146 concepts are found to exhibit one or more inconsistencies.

conclusionsThe assessment of the sample concepts shows that SNOMED CT is not free from inconsistencies which may affect its use in clinical care and decision support systems. The proposed methodology is found to be effective in identifying areas of SNOMED CT that may be in need of quality assessment.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsSystematized Nomenclature of MedicineTerminology as TopicClinical Decision-MakingHumansProbabilityTomography, X-Ray ComputedAuditingContextualLexical analysisQuality assuranceSimilarity setsSNOMED CT

Identifiers

PMID30537959
PMCPMC6290591

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.