Using critiquing for improving medical protocols: Harder than it seems

Mar Marcos, Geert Berger, Frank van Harmelen, Annette ten Teije, Hugo Roomans, Silvia Miksch

Research output: Chapter in Book / Report / Conference proceedingConference contributionAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Medical protocols are widely recognised to provide clinicians with high-quality and up-to-date recommendations. A critical condition for this is of course that the protocols themselves are of high quality. In this paper we investigate the use of critiquing for improving the quality of medical protocols. We constructed a detailed formal model of the jaundice protocol of the American Association of Pediatrics in the Asbru representation language. We recorded the actions performed by a pediatrician while solving a set of test cases. We then compared these expert actions with the steps recommended by the formalised protocol, and analysed the differences that we observed. Even our relatively small test set of 7 cases revealed many mismatches between the actions performed by the expert and the protocol recommendations, which suggest improvements of the protocol. A major problem in our case study was to establish a mapping between the actions performed by the expert and the steps suggested by the protocol. We discuss the reasons for this difficulty, and assess its consequences for the automation of the critiquing process.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationArtificial Intelligence in Medicine - 8th Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Medicine in Europe, AIME 2001, Proceedings
PublisherSpringer/Verlag
Pages431-441
Number of pages11
Volume2101
ISBN (Print)3540422943, 9783540422945
Publication statusPublished - 2001
Event8th Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Medicine in Europe, AIME 2001 - Cascais, Portugal
Duration: 1 Jul 20014 Jul 2001

Publication series

NameLecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)
Volume2101
ISSN (Print)03029743
ISSN (Electronic)16113349

Conference

Conference8th Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Medicine in Europe, AIME 2001
CountryPortugal
CityCascais
Period1/07/014/07/01

Fingerprint

Pediatrics
Automation
Recommendations
Test Set
Formal Model

Cite this

Marcos, M., Berger, G., van Harmelen, F., ten Teije, A., Roomans, H., & Miksch, S. (2001). Using critiquing for improving medical protocols: Harder than it seems. In Artificial Intelligence in Medicine - 8th Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Medicine in Europe, AIME 2001, Proceedings (Vol. 2101, pp. 431-441). (Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics); Vol. 2101). Springer/Verlag.
Marcos, Mar ; Berger, Geert ; van Harmelen, Frank ; ten Teije, Annette ; Roomans, Hugo ; Miksch, Silvia. / Using critiquing for improving medical protocols : Harder than it seems. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine - 8th Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Medicine in Europe, AIME 2001, Proceedings. Vol. 2101 Springer/Verlag, 2001. pp. 431-441 (Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)).
@inproceedings{3050714490394955af00ed895a24a2b4,
title = "Using critiquing for improving medical protocols: Harder than it seems",
abstract = "Medical protocols are widely recognised to provide clinicians with high-quality and up-to-date recommendations. A critical condition for this is of course that the protocols themselves are of high quality. In this paper we investigate the use of critiquing for improving the quality of medical protocols. We constructed a detailed formal model of the jaundice protocol of the American Association of Pediatrics in the Asbru representation language. We recorded the actions performed by a pediatrician while solving a set of test cases. We then compared these expert actions with the steps recommended by the formalised protocol, and analysed the differences that we observed. Even our relatively small test set of 7 cases revealed many mismatches between the actions performed by the expert and the protocol recommendations, which suggest improvements of the protocol. A major problem in our case study was to establish a mapping between the actions performed by the expert and the steps suggested by the protocol. We discuss the reasons for this difficulty, and assess its consequences for the automation of the critiquing process.",
author = "Mar Marcos and Geert Berger and {van Harmelen}, Frank and {ten Teije}, Annette and Hugo Roomans and Silvia Miksch",
year = "2001",
language = "English",
isbn = "3540422943",
volume = "2101",
series = "Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)",
publisher = "Springer/Verlag",
pages = "431--441",
booktitle = "Artificial Intelligence in Medicine - 8th Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Medicine in Europe, AIME 2001, Proceedings",

}

Marcos, M, Berger, G, van Harmelen, F, ten Teije, A, Roomans, H & Miksch, S 2001, Using critiquing for improving medical protocols: Harder than it seems. in Artificial Intelligence in Medicine - 8th Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Medicine in Europe, AIME 2001, Proceedings. vol. 2101, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), vol. 2101, Springer/Verlag, pp. 431-441, 8th Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Medicine in Europe, AIME 2001, Cascais, Portugal, 1/07/01.

Using critiquing for improving medical protocols : Harder than it seems. / Marcos, Mar; Berger, Geert; van Harmelen, Frank; ten Teije, Annette; Roomans, Hugo; Miksch, Silvia.

Artificial Intelligence in Medicine - 8th Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Medicine in Europe, AIME 2001, Proceedings. Vol. 2101 Springer/Verlag, 2001. p. 431-441 (Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics); Vol. 2101).

Research output: Chapter in Book / Report / Conference proceedingConference contributionAcademicpeer-review

TY - GEN

T1 - Using critiquing for improving medical protocols

T2 - Harder than it seems

AU - Marcos, Mar

AU - Berger, Geert

AU - van Harmelen, Frank

AU - ten Teije, Annette

AU - Roomans, Hugo

AU - Miksch, Silvia

PY - 2001

Y1 - 2001

N2 - Medical protocols are widely recognised to provide clinicians with high-quality and up-to-date recommendations. A critical condition for this is of course that the protocols themselves are of high quality. In this paper we investigate the use of critiquing for improving the quality of medical protocols. We constructed a detailed formal model of the jaundice protocol of the American Association of Pediatrics in the Asbru representation language. We recorded the actions performed by a pediatrician while solving a set of test cases. We then compared these expert actions with the steps recommended by the formalised protocol, and analysed the differences that we observed. Even our relatively small test set of 7 cases revealed many mismatches between the actions performed by the expert and the protocol recommendations, which suggest improvements of the protocol. A major problem in our case study was to establish a mapping between the actions performed by the expert and the steps suggested by the protocol. We discuss the reasons for this difficulty, and assess its consequences for the automation of the critiquing process.

AB - Medical protocols are widely recognised to provide clinicians with high-quality and up-to-date recommendations. A critical condition for this is of course that the protocols themselves are of high quality. In this paper we investigate the use of critiquing for improving the quality of medical protocols. We constructed a detailed formal model of the jaundice protocol of the American Association of Pediatrics in the Asbru representation language. We recorded the actions performed by a pediatrician while solving a set of test cases. We then compared these expert actions with the steps recommended by the formalised protocol, and analysed the differences that we observed. Even our relatively small test set of 7 cases revealed many mismatches between the actions performed by the expert and the protocol recommendations, which suggest improvements of the protocol. A major problem in our case study was to establish a mapping between the actions performed by the expert and the steps suggested by the protocol. We discuss the reasons for this difficulty, and assess its consequences for the automation of the critiquing process.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84947425477&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84947425477&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Conference contribution

SN - 3540422943

SN - 9783540422945

VL - 2101

T3 - Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

SP - 431

EP - 441

BT - Artificial Intelligence in Medicine - 8th Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Medicine in Europe, AIME 2001, Proceedings

PB - Springer/Verlag

ER -

Marcos M, Berger G, van Harmelen F, ten Teije A, Roomans H, Miksch S. Using critiquing for improving medical protocols: Harder than it seems. In Artificial Intelligence in Medicine - 8th Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Medicine in Europe, AIME 2001, Proceedings. Vol. 2101. Springer/Verlag. 2001. p. 431-441. (Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)).