ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2020
Utilization of BPM+ Health for the Representation of Clinical Knowledge: A Framework for the Expression and Assessment of Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) Utilizing Existing and Emerging Object Management Group (OMG) Standards.
Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2020. 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.
- The Business Process Management for Healthcare (BPM+ Health) Consortium: motivation, methodology, and deliverables for enabling clinical knowledge interoperability (CKI).Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024Article
- Improving the Quality and Utility of Electronic Health Record Data through Ontologies.Standards (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- An Integrated Process for Co-Developing and Implementing Written and Computable Clinical Practice Guidelines.American journal of medical quality : the official journal of the American College of Medical QualityArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG), meant to express best practices in healthcare, are commonly presented as narrative documents communicating care processes, decision making, and clinical case knowledge. However, these narratives in and of themselves lack the specificity and conciseness in their use of language to unambiguously express quality clinical recommendations. This impacts the confidence of clinicians, uptake, and implementation of the guidance. As important as the quality of the clinical knowledge articulated, is the quality of the language(s) and methods used to express the recommendations. In this paper, we propose the BPM+ family of modeling languages as a potential solution to this challenge. We present a formalized process and framework for translating CPGs into a standardized BPM+ model. Further, we discuss the features and characteristics of modeling languages that underpin the quality in expressing clinical recommendations. Using an existing CPG, we defined a systematic series of steps to deconstruct the CPG into knowledge constituents, assign CPG knowledge constituents to BPM+ elements, and re-assemble the parts into a clear, precise, and executable model. Limitations of both the CPG and the current BPM+ languages are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33936443PMC8075494What 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.