Literature DB >> 18852847

Expert systems for clinical pathology reporting.

Glenn A Edwards1.   

Abstract

* Conventional automated interpretative reporting systems use standard or "canned" comments for patient reports. These are result-specific and do not generally refer to the patient context. * Laboratory information systems (LIS) are limited in their application of patient-specific content of reporting. * Patient-specific interpretation requires extensive cross-referencing to other information contained in the LIS such as previous test results, other related tests, and clinical notes, both current and previous. * Expert systems have the potential to improve reporting quality by enabling patient-specific reporting in clinical laboratories.

Entities:  

Year:  2008        PMID: 18852847      PMCID: PMC2556573     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Biochem Rev        ISSN: 0159-8090


  8 in total

1.  Patient-specific narrative interpretations of complex clinical laboratory evaluations: who is competent to provide them?

Authors:  Michael Laposata
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 8.327

2.  Physician survey of a laboratory medicine interpretive service and evaluation of the influence of interpretations on laboratory test ordering.

Authors:  Martha E Laposata; Michael Laposata; Elizabeth M Van Cott; Dion S Buchner; Mohammed S Kashalo; Anand S Dighe
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 5.534

3.  Are biochemistry interpretative comments helpful? Results of a general practitioner and nurse practitioner survey.

Authors:  Ian M Barlow
Journal:  Ann Clin Biochem       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 2.057

4.  PEIRS: a pathologist-maintained expert system for the interpretation of chemical pathology reports.

Authors:  G Edwards; P Compton; R Malor; A Srinivasan; L Lazarus
Journal:  Pathology       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 5.306

5.  Prudent expert systems with credentials: managing the expertise of decision support systems.

Authors:  G Edwards; B H Kang; P Preston; P Compton
Journal:  Int J Biomed Comput       Date:  1995-10

6.  Computer-assisted diagnosis of acute azotaemia: diagnostic strategy and diagnostic criteria.

Authors:  S Fugleberg; A Greulich; D I Stenver
Journal:  Comput Biol Med       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 4.589

7.  Development and retrospective evaluation of Hepaxpert-I: a routinely-used expert system for interpretive analysis of hepatitis A and B serologic findings.

Authors:  K P Adlassnig; W Horak
Journal:  Artif Intell Med       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 5.326

8.  Quality assessment of interpretative commenting in clinical chemistry.

Authors:  Ee Mun Lim; Ken A Sikaris; Janice Gill; John Calleja; Peter E Hickman; John Beilby; Samuel D Vasikaran
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 8.327

  8 in total
  3 in total

Review 1.  Informatics and the clinical laboratory.

Authors:  Richard G Jones; Owen A Johnson; Gifford Batstone
Journal:  Clin Biochem Rev       Date:  2014-08

2.  Natural language processing systems for pathology parsing in limited data environments with uncertainty estimation.

Authors:  Anobel Y Odisho; Briton Park; Nicholas Altieri; John DeNero; Matthew R Cooperberg; Peter R Carroll; Bin Yu
Journal:  JAMIA Open       Date:  2020-10-14

3.  Multicenter Survey of Physicians' Perception of Interpretative Commenting and Reflective Testing in Nigeria.

Authors:  Lucius Chidiebere Imoh; Chinelo Pamela Onyenekwu; Kenneth Ogar Inaku; Alexander Oghielu Abu; Chibuzo David Tagbo; Idris Yahaya Mohammed; Modupe Akinrele Kuti
Journal:  EJIFCC       Date:  2021-02-28
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.