Clinical terminology: why is it so hard? Export

@article{citeulike:1287740, abstract = {Despite years of work, no re-usable clinical terminology has yet been demonstrated in widespread use. This paper puts forward ten reasons why developing such terminologies is hard. All stem from underestimating the change entailed in using terminology in software for 'patient centred' systems rather than for its traditional functions of statistical and financial reporting. Firstly, the increase in scale and complexity are enormous. Secondly, the resulting scale exceeds what can be managed manually with the rigour required by software, but building appropriate rigorous representations on the necessary scale is, in itself, a hard problem. Thirdly, 'clinical pragmatics'--practical data entry, presentation and retrieval for clinical tasks--must be taken into account, so that the intrinsic differences between the needs of users and the needs of software are addressed. This implies that validation of clinical terminologies must include validation in use as implemented in software.}, address = {Department of Computer Science, University of Manchester, UK. rector@cs.man.ac.uk}, author = {Rector, A. L.}, citeulike-article-id = {1287740}, citeulike-linkout-0 = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1267/METH99040239}, citeulike-linkout-1 = {http://view.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10805008}, citeulike-linkout-2 = {http://www.hubmed.org/display.cgi?uids=10805008}, citeulike-linkout-3 = {http://www.cs.manchester.ac.uk/~rector/modules/cds/Why-is-terminology-hard-single-r2.pdf}, comment = {'''Warning''': The PDF linked from http://www.cs.manchester.ac.uk/\~{}rector/modules/cds/Why-is-terminology-hard-single-r2.pdf contains a pre-published version with layout different than the published version. I have not compared the text content. }, doi = {10.1267/METH99040239}, issn = {0026-1270}, journal = {Methods of information in medicine}, keywords = {medical-informatics, tbmi19, theme3}, month = {December}, number = {4-5}, pages = {239--252}, posted-at = {2009-09-15 17:39:00}, priority = {2}, title = {Clinical terminology: why is it so hard?}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1267/METH99040239}, volume = {38}, year = {1999} }

TY - JOUR ID - citeulike:1287740 L3 - citeulike-article-id:1287740 N2 - Despite years of work, no re-usable clinical terminology has yet been demonstrated in widespread use. This paper puts forward ten reasons why developing such terminologies is hard. All stem from underestimating the change entailed in using terminology in software for 'patient centred' systems rather than for its traditional functions of statistical and financial reporting. Firstly, the increase in scale and complexity are enormous. Secondly, the resulting scale exceeds what can be managed manually with the rigour required by software, but building appropriate rigorous representations on the necessary scale is, in itself, a hard problem. Thirdly, 'clinical pragmatics'--practical data entry, presentation and retrieval for clinical tasks--must be taken into account, so that the intrinsic differences between the needs of users and the needs of software are addressed. This implies that validation of clinical terminologies must include validation in use as implemented in software. IS - 4-5 JF - Methods of information in medicine SN - 0026-1270 AD - Department of Computer Science, University of Manchester, UK. rector@cs.man.ac.uk EP - 252 TI - Clinical terminology: why is it so hard? VL - 38 SP - 239 KW - medical-informatics KW - tbmi19 KW - theme3 N1 - '''Warning''': The PDF linked from http://www.cs.manchester.ac.uk/~rector/modules/cds/Why-is-terminology-hard-single-r2.pdf contains a pre-published version with layout different than the published version. I have not compared the text content. AU - Rector, AL PY - 1999/12// UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1267/METH99040239 ER -