Loading…

A Method for Computing Conceptual Distances between Medical Recommendations: Experiments in Modeling Medical Disagreement

Using natural language processing tools, we investigate the semantic differences in medical guidelines for three decision problems: breast cancer screening, lower back pain and hypertension management. The recommendation differences may cause undue variability in patient treatments and outcomes. The...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Applied sciences 2021-03, Vol.11 (5), p.2045
Main Authors: Hematialam, Hossein, Garbayo, Luciana, Gopalakrishnan, Seethalakshmi, Zadrozny, Wlodek W.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-9017a4d5659a65baa67ba1eabc4ebecfce9c3d8277c0997bc7967aa5d9e9b8703
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-9017a4d5659a65baa67ba1eabc4ebecfce9c3d8277c0997bc7967aa5d9e9b8703
container_end_page
container_issue 5
container_start_page 2045
container_title Applied sciences
container_volume 11
creator Hematialam, Hossein
Garbayo, Luciana
Gopalakrishnan, Seethalakshmi
Zadrozny, Wlodek W.
description Using natural language processing tools, we investigate the semantic differences in medical guidelines for three decision problems: breast cancer screening, lower back pain and hypertension management. The recommendation differences may cause undue variability in patient treatments and outcomes. Therefore, having a better understanding of their causes can contribute to a discussion on possible remedies. We show that these differences in recommendations are highly correlated with the knowledge brought to the problem by different medical societies, as reflected in the conceptual vocabularies used by the different groups of authors. While this article is a case study using three sets of guidelines, the proposed methodology is broadly applicable. Technically, our method combines word embeddings and a novel graph-based similarity model for comparing collections of documents. For our main case study, we use the CDC summaries of the recommendations (very short documents) and full (long) texts of guidelines represented as bags of concepts. For the other case studies, we compare the full text of guidelines with their abstracts and tables, summarizing the differences between recommendations. The proposed approach is evaluated using different language models and different distance measures. In all the experiments, the results are highly statistically significant. We discuss the significance of the results, their possible extensions, and connections to other domains of knowledge. We conclude that automated methods, although not perfect, can be applicable to conceptual comparisons of different medical guidelines and can enable their analysis at scale.
doi_str_mv 10.3390/app11052045
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_0e52638de4f3475b80646857dfc18784</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_0e52638de4f3475b80646857dfc18784</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>2524470540</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-9017a4d5659a65baa67ba1eabc4ebecfce9c3d8277c0997bc7967aa5d9e9b8703</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpNkU1LAzEQhhdRUKon_8CCR6kmm6-NN6lVC4ogeg6zyWzd0m7WJEX996ZWpXOZr3eeGZiiOKXkgjFNLmEYKCWiIlzsFUcVUXLMOFX7O_FhcRLjgmTTlNWUHBVf1-UjpjfvytaHcuJXwzp1_TxHvcUhrWFZ3nQxQc5i2WD6QOzzhOts7jyj9asV9g5S5_t4VU4_BwxdrqRYdlnnHS43tL-BjIJ5QNwojouDFpYRT379qHi9nb5M7scPT3ezyfXD2DLJ01gTqoA7IYUGKRoAqRqgCI3l2KBtLWrLXF0pZYnWqrFKSwUgnEbd1IqwUTHbcp2HhRnyeRC-jIfO_BR8mBsIqbNLNARFJVntkLeMK9HURHJZC-VaS2tV88w627KG4N_XGJNZ-HXo8_mmEhXnigi-2Xi-VdngYwzY_m-lxGxeZXZexb4BU4mHZw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2524470540</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A Method for Computing Conceptual Distances between Medical Recommendations: Experiments in Modeling Medical Disagreement</title><source>Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)</source><creator>Hematialam, Hossein ; Garbayo, Luciana ; Gopalakrishnan, Seethalakshmi ; Zadrozny, Wlodek W.</creator><creatorcontrib>Hematialam, Hossein ; Garbayo, Luciana ; Gopalakrishnan, Seethalakshmi ; Zadrozny, Wlodek W.</creatorcontrib><description>Using natural language processing tools, we investigate the semantic differences in medical guidelines for three decision problems: breast cancer screening, lower back pain and hypertension management. The recommendation differences may cause undue variability in patient treatments and outcomes. Therefore, having a better understanding of their causes can contribute to a discussion on possible remedies. We show that these differences in recommendations are highly correlated with the knowledge brought to the problem by different medical societies, as reflected in the conceptual vocabularies used by the different groups of authors. While this article is a case study using three sets of guidelines, the proposed methodology is broadly applicable. Technically, our method combines word embeddings and a novel graph-based similarity model for comparing collections of documents. For our main case study, we use the CDC summaries of the recommendations (very short documents) and full (long) texts of guidelines represented as bags of concepts. For the other case studies, we compare the full text of guidelines with their abstracts and tables, summarizing the differences between recommendations. The proposed approach is evaluated using different language models and different distance measures. In all the experiments, the results are highly statistically significant. We discuss the significance of the results, their possible extensions, and connections to other domains of knowledge. We conclude that automated methods, although not perfect, can be applicable to conceptual comparisons of different medical guidelines and can enable their analysis at scale.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2076-3417</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2076-3417</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/app11052045</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Basel: MDPI AG</publisher><subject>Automation ; Back pain ; Breast cancer ; Cancer screening ; Case studies ; Clinical medicine ; conceptual similarity ; disagreement ; Distance measurement ; Experiments ; graphs ; Guidelines ; Hypertension ; Knowledge ; Language ; Low back pain ; Mammography ; medical guidelines ; Medical research ; Medical screening ; Natural language processing ; Pain management ; Semantics ; Statistical analysis ; word embeddings</subject><ispartof>Applied sciences, 2021-03, Vol.11 (5), p.2045</ispartof><rights>2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-9017a4d5659a65baa67ba1eabc4ebecfce9c3d8277c0997bc7967aa5d9e9b8703</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-9017a4d5659a65baa67ba1eabc4ebecfce9c3d8277c0997bc7967aa5d9e9b8703</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-4844-9117</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2524470540/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2524470540?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,25732,27903,27904,36991,44569,74872</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hematialam, Hossein</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Garbayo, Luciana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gopalakrishnan, Seethalakshmi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zadrozny, Wlodek W.</creatorcontrib><title>A Method for Computing Conceptual Distances between Medical Recommendations: Experiments in Modeling Medical Disagreement</title><title>Applied sciences</title><description>Using natural language processing tools, we investigate the semantic differences in medical guidelines for three decision problems: breast cancer screening, lower back pain and hypertension management. The recommendation differences may cause undue variability in patient treatments and outcomes. Therefore, having a better understanding of their causes can contribute to a discussion on possible remedies. We show that these differences in recommendations are highly correlated with the knowledge brought to the problem by different medical societies, as reflected in the conceptual vocabularies used by the different groups of authors. While this article is a case study using three sets of guidelines, the proposed methodology is broadly applicable. Technically, our method combines word embeddings and a novel graph-based similarity model for comparing collections of documents. For our main case study, we use the CDC summaries of the recommendations (very short documents) and full (long) texts of guidelines represented as bags of concepts. For the other case studies, we compare the full text of guidelines with their abstracts and tables, summarizing the differences between recommendations. The proposed approach is evaluated using different language models and different distance measures. In all the experiments, the results are highly statistically significant. We discuss the significance of the results, their possible extensions, and connections to other domains of knowledge. We conclude that automated methods, although not perfect, can be applicable to conceptual comparisons of different medical guidelines and can enable their analysis at scale.</description><subject>Automation</subject><subject>Back pain</subject><subject>Breast cancer</subject><subject>Cancer screening</subject><subject>Case studies</subject><subject>Clinical medicine</subject><subject>conceptual similarity</subject><subject>disagreement</subject><subject>Distance measurement</subject><subject>Experiments</subject><subject>graphs</subject><subject>Guidelines</subject><subject>Hypertension</subject><subject>Knowledge</subject><subject>Language</subject><subject>Low back pain</subject><subject>Mammography</subject><subject>medical guidelines</subject><subject>Medical research</subject><subject>Medical screening</subject><subject>Natural language processing</subject><subject>Pain management</subject><subject>Semantics</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><subject>word embeddings</subject><issn>2076-3417</issn><issn>2076-3417</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNpNkU1LAzEQhhdRUKon_8CCR6kmm6-NN6lVC4ogeg6zyWzd0m7WJEX996ZWpXOZr3eeGZiiOKXkgjFNLmEYKCWiIlzsFUcVUXLMOFX7O_FhcRLjgmTTlNWUHBVf1-UjpjfvytaHcuJXwzp1_TxHvcUhrWFZ3nQxQc5i2WD6QOzzhOts7jyj9asV9g5S5_t4VU4_BwxdrqRYdlnnHS43tL-BjIJ5QNwojouDFpYRT379qHi9nb5M7scPT3ezyfXD2DLJ01gTqoA7IYUGKRoAqRqgCI3l2KBtLWrLXF0pZYnWqrFKSwUgnEbd1IqwUTHbcp2HhRnyeRC-jIfO_BR8mBsIqbNLNARFJVntkLeMK9HURHJZC-VaS2tV88w627KG4N_XGJNZ-HXo8_mmEhXnigi-2Xi-VdngYwzY_m-lxGxeZXZexb4BU4mHZw</recordid><startdate>20210301</startdate><enddate>20210301</enddate><creator>Hematialam, Hossein</creator><creator>Garbayo, Luciana</creator><creator>Gopalakrishnan, Seethalakshmi</creator><creator>Zadrozny, Wlodek W.</creator><general>MDPI AG</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4844-9117</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210301</creationdate><title>A Method for Computing Conceptual Distances between Medical Recommendations: Experiments in Modeling Medical Disagreement</title><author>Hematialam, Hossein ; Garbayo, Luciana ; Gopalakrishnan, Seethalakshmi ; Zadrozny, Wlodek W.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-9017a4d5659a65baa67ba1eabc4ebecfce9c3d8277c0997bc7967aa5d9e9b8703</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Automation</topic><topic>Back pain</topic><topic>Breast cancer</topic><topic>Cancer screening</topic><topic>Case studies</topic><topic>Clinical medicine</topic><topic>conceptual similarity</topic><topic>disagreement</topic><topic>Distance measurement</topic><topic>Experiments</topic><topic>graphs</topic><topic>Guidelines</topic><topic>Hypertension</topic><topic>Knowledge</topic><topic>Language</topic><topic>Low back pain</topic><topic>Mammography</topic><topic>medical guidelines</topic><topic>Medical research</topic><topic>Medical screening</topic><topic>Natural language processing</topic><topic>Pain management</topic><topic>Semantics</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><topic>word embeddings</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hematialam, Hossein</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Garbayo, Luciana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gopalakrishnan, Seethalakshmi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zadrozny, Wlodek W.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Applied sciences</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hematialam, Hossein</au><au>Garbayo, Luciana</au><au>Gopalakrishnan, Seethalakshmi</au><au>Zadrozny, Wlodek W.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A Method for Computing Conceptual Distances between Medical Recommendations: Experiments in Modeling Medical Disagreement</atitle><jtitle>Applied sciences</jtitle><date>2021-03-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>11</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>2045</spage><pages>2045-</pages><issn>2076-3417</issn><eissn>2076-3417</eissn><abstract>Using natural language processing tools, we investigate the semantic differences in medical guidelines for three decision problems: breast cancer screening, lower back pain and hypertension management. The recommendation differences may cause undue variability in patient treatments and outcomes. Therefore, having a better understanding of their causes can contribute to a discussion on possible remedies. We show that these differences in recommendations are highly correlated with the knowledge brought to the problem by different medical societies, as reflected in the conceptual vocabularies used by the different groups of authors. While this article is a case study using three sets of guidelines, the proposed methodology is broadly applicable. Technically, our method combines word embeddings and a novel graph-based similarity model for comparing collections of documents. For our main case study, we use the CDC summaries of the recommendations (very short documents) and full (long) texts of guidelines represented as bags of concepts. For the other case studies, we compare the full text of guidelines with their abstracts and tables, summarizing the differences between recommendations. The proposed approach is evaluated using different language models and different distance measures. In all the experiments, the results are highly statistically significant. We discuss the significance of the results, their possible extensions, and connections to other domains of knowledge. We conclude that automated methods, although not perfect, can be applicable to conceptual comparisons of different medical guidelines and can enable their analysis at scale.</abstract><cop>Basel</cop><pub>MDPI AG</pub><doi>10.3390/app11052045</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4844-9117</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2076-3417
ispartof Applied sciences, 2021-03, Vol.11 (5), p.2045
issn 2076-3417
2076-3417
language eng
recordid cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_0e52638de4f3475b80646857dfc18784
source Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)
subjects Automation
Back pain
Breast cancer
Cancer screening
Case studies
Clinical medicine
conceptual similarity
disagreement
Distance measurement
Experiments
graphs
Guidelines
Hypertension
Knowledge
Language
Low back pain
Mammography
medical guidelines
Medical research
Medical screening
Natural language processing
Pain management
Semantics
Statistical analysis
word embeddings
title A Method for Computing Conceptual Distances between Medical Recommendations: Experiments in Modeling Medical Disagreement
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T02%3A32%3A17IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20Method%20for%20Computing%20Conceptual%20Distances%20between%20Medical%20Recommendations:%20Experiments%20in%20Modeling%20Medical%20Disagreement&rft.jtitle=Applied%20sciences&rft.au=Hematialam,%20Hossein&rft.date=2021-03-01&rft.volume=11&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=2045&rft.pages=2045-&rft.issn=2076-3417&rft.eissn=2076-3417&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/app11052045&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_doaj_%3E2524470540%3C/proquest_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-9017a4d5659a65baa67ba1eabc4ebecfce9c3d8277c0997bc7967aa5d9e9b8703%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2524470540&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true