Gai Elhanan1, Yehoshua Perl, James Geller. 1. Department of Computer Science, New Jersey Institute of Technology (NJIT), Newark, New Jersey 07102-1982, USA. gelhanan@gmail.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Little information exists concerning SNOMED CT (systematized nomenclature of medicine-clinical terms) users. This report describes current impressions and preferences of direct SNOMED CT users regarding coverage, quality, and concept details, and the change request mechanism. DESIGN: A 43-question anonymous survey distributed electronically to relevant online communities. MEASUREMENTS: Data on user demographic characteristics, modes and purposes of use, means and frequencies of access, satisfaction with SNOMED CT content coverage and quality and with the change request mechanism were recorded. RESULTS: The survey was conducted in January 2010 and elicited 215 responses. Details regarding users' profiles, modes of use and access were reported elsewhere. The coverage of SNOMED CT was perceived to be at least 85% complete by 42% of responders, and 60% were at least satisfied with its quality. Various deficiencies were encountered at least 'somewhat often' by 28-61% of responders. Incorrect data were more bothersome than missing data. Users indicated that significant resources should be allocated to more consistent and complete conceptual representations and to further enhance content coverage. Enhanced synonym coverage and the introduction of textual definitions were important to users (54% and 63%, respectively). LIMITATIONS: A survey format with limited control over recruitment and selection bias. Lack of information regarding the SNOMED CT version used by responders. CONCLUSION: Despite overall satisfaction, direct users indicated a strong desire to improve consistency, quality, and completeness of conceptual representations and concept details, as well as a continued desire to expand coverage. The survey provides much needed data for informed decisions regarding the use and development goals of SNOMED CT. Focused periodical surveys are warranted.
OBJECTIVE: Little information exists concerning SNOMED CT (systematized nomenclature of medicine-clinical terms) users. This report describes current impressions and preferences of direct SNOMED CT users regarding coverage, quality, and concept details, and the change request mechanism. DESIGN: A 43-question anonymous survey distributed electronically to relevant online communities. MEASUREMENTS: Data on user demographic characteristics, modes and purposes of use, means and frequencies of access, satisfaction with SNOMED CT content coverage and quality and with the change request mechanism were recorded. RESULTS: The survey was conducted in January 2010 and elicited 215 responses. Details regarding users' profiles, modes of use and access were reported elsewhere. The coverage of SNOMED CT was perceived to be at least 85% complete by 42% of responders, and 60% were at least satisfied with its quality. Various deficiencies were encountered at least 'somewhat often' by 28-61% of responders. Incorrect data were more bothersome than missing data. Users indicated that significant resources should be allocated to more consistent and complete conceptual representations and to further enhance content coverage. Enhanced synonym coverage and the introduction of textual definitions were important to users (54% and 63%, respectively). LIMITATIONS: A survey format with limited control over recruitment and selection bias. Lack of information regarding the SNOMED CT version used by responders. CONCLUSION: Despite overall satisfaction, direct users indicated a strong desire to improve consistency, quality, and completeness of conceptual representations and concept details, as well as a continued desire to expand coverage. The survey provides much needed data for informed decisions regarding the use and development goals of SNOMED CT. Focused periodical surveys are warranted.
Authors: Clement J McDonald; Stanley M Huff; Jeffrey G Suico; Gilbert Hill; Dennis Leavelle; Raymond Aller; Arden Forrey; Kathy Mercer; Georges DeMoor; John Hook; Warren Williams; James Case; Pat Maloney Journal: Clin Chem Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 8.327
Authors: Robert H Dolin; John E Mattison; Simon Cohn; Keith E Campbell; Andrew M Wiesenthal; Brad Hochhalter; Diane LaBerge; Rita Barsoum; James Shalaby; Alan Abilla; Robert J Clements; Carol M Correia; Diane Esteva; John M Fedack; Bruce J Goldberg; Sridhar Gopalarao; Eza Hafeza; Peter Hendler; Enrique Hernandez; Ron Kamangar; Rafique A Kahn; Georgina Kurtovich; Gerry Lazzareschi; Moon H Lee; Tracy Lee; David Levy; Jonathan Y Lukoff; Cyndie Lundberg; Michael P Madden; Trongtu L Ngo; Ben T Nguyen; Nikhilkumar P Patel; Jim Resneck; David E Ross; Kathleen M Schwarz; Charles C Selhorst; Aaron Snyder; Mohamed I Umarji; Max Vilner; Roy Zer-Chen; Chris Zingo Journal: Stud Health Technol Inform Date: 2004
Authors: Michael J Lincoln; Steven H Brown; Viet Nguyen; Tim Cromwell; John Carter; Mark Erlbaum; Mark Tuttle Journal: Stud Health Technol Inform Date: 2004
Authors: Janet F E Penz; Steven H Brown; John S Carter; Peter L Elkin; Viet N Nguyen; Shannon A Sims; Michael J Lincoln Journal: Stud Health Technol Inform Date: 2004
Authors: Christopher Ochs; James Geller; Yehoshua Perl; Yan Chen; Ankur Agrawal; James T Case; George Hripcsak Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2014-10-20 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Christopher Ochs; James Geller; Yehoshua Perl; Yan Chen; Junchuan Xu; Hua Min; James T Case; Zhi Wei Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2014-10-21 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Christopher Ochs; Yehoshua Perl; James Geller; Michael Halper; Huanying Gu; Yan Chen; Gai Elhanan Journal: AMIA Annu Symp Proc Date: 2013-11-16