ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2025
A knowledge-based clinical decision support system for personalized health examination items in China: design and evaluation.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHealth examination identifies risk factors and diseases at an early stage through a series of health examination items. In China, however, the incidence of consulting services for health examination items is low and the current health examination item package is insufficiently personalized. Therefore, we created and evaluated a clinical decision support system (CDSS) for personalized health examination items.
methodsAn ontology with the data properties as the core design was created to guide the knowledge expression. A knowledge graph composed of ontology-guided property graphs was developed to provide rich and clear decision-making knowledge. The system, including the web for primary care clinicians and the app for participants, was constructed to directly assist primary care clinicians through personalized and interpretable health examination item recommendations. The enter rate and mapping rate were created to evaluate the system's capability to process input health feature data. The two-step expert evaluation was designed to assess whether recommendations with several health examination items were appropriate for participants. The system recommendations and existing packages were compared to the expert's gold standard.
resultsThere were 15 classes, 2-level class hierarchies, 3 types of object properties, and 16 types of data properties in the health examination item recommendation ontology. Several different data properties could express a piece of complex decision-making knowledge and reduce the number of classes. There were 584 classes, 781 object properties, and 1094 data properties in the knowledge graph. Retrospective data from 70 participants, with a total of 472 health features, were selected for system evaluation. The ontology can cover 96.2% of the health features. 56.4% health features entered into the system had corresponding health examination items. The precision and recall of the system were 96.3% and 84.8%, and the packages were 72.5% and 69.1%.
conclusionsThe performance of this system was close to experts and outperformed the current impersonalized health examination item packages. This system could improve the personalization of health examination items and the health examination consultation services, and promote participants' engagement in the health examination.
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.