Active design reviews: principles and practices
Journal of Systems and Software
Software—Practice & Experience
Cognitive models of directional inference in expert medical reasoning
Expertise in context
Software Inspection
Strengthening the Case for Pair Programming
IEEE Software
GLIF3: a representation format for sharable computer-interpretable clinical practice guidelines
Journal of Biomedical Informatics
Verification of Medical Guidelines Using Background Knowledge in Task Networks
IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering
Journal of Biomedical Informatics
Variation prediction in clinical processes
AIME'11 Proceedings of the 13th conference on Artificial intelligence in medicine
Methodological Review: Computer-interpretable clinical guidelines: A methodological review
Journal of Biomedical Informatics
Hi-index | 0.00 |
Errors in clinical practice guidelines may translate into errors in real-world clinical practice. The best way to eliminate these errors is to understand how they are generated, thus enabling the future development of methods to catch errors made in creating the guideline before publication. We examined the process by which a medical expert from the American College of Physicians (ACP) created clinical algorithms from narrative guidelines, as a case study. We studied this process by looking at intermediate versions produced during the algorithm creation. We identified and analyzed errors that were generated at each stage, categorized them using Knuth's classification scheme, and studied patterns of errors that were made over the set of algorithm versions that were created. We then assessed possible explanations for the sources of these errors and provided recommendations for reducing the number of errors, based on cognitive theory and on experience drawn from software engineering methodologies.