Diagnostic and Prognostic Decision-Making Systems: A Survey of Recent Developments in the United States

  • R. A. Miller
Conference paper
Part of the Medizinische Informatik und Statistik book series (MEDINFO, volume 50)

Abstract

Over a decade ago, D. J.CROFT [1] wrote a review article, asking ‘Is Computerized Diagnosis Possible?’. His sentiments were echoed in a 1977 editorial by R.B. FRIEDMAN and D.H. GUSTAFSON [2] stating: ‘Successful applications in many other areas have been reported but the overall impact of computers on health care delivery has been less than was expected as recently as 5 years ago’. There are still no major successes to report in the realm of computerized diagnosis, but progress has been made. Two ‘second-generation’ artificial intelligence programs for medical diagnosis — ABEL and CADUCEUS — are reviewed below. Both are in the early stages of development. At this time, the prognosis for computerization remains unclear.

By contrast, two successful programs for computer-generated patient prognosis have been used regulary in a clinical setting. Both — ARAMIS and the Duke Cardiovascular Disease Databank — have assisted physicians in the management of individual patients, and resulted in useful general observations that have been published in the medical literature. A comparison between programs for patient prognosis and programs for medical diagnosis is made in this paper.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Croft, D.J.: Is computerized diagnosis possible? Comput. biomed. Res. 5 (1972) 351–367.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Friedman, R.B., Gustafson D.H.: Computers in clinical medicine, a critical review. Comput. biomed. Res. (1977) 199–204.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Reichertz, P.L.: Medical informatics — fiction or reality. Meth. Inform. Med. 19 (1980) 11–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yu, V.L.: Conceptual obstacles in computerized medical diagnosis. J. Med. Philos. 8 (1983) 67–75.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Blois, M.S.: Conceptual issues in computer-aided diagnosis and the hierarchical nature of medical knowledge. J. Med. Philos. 8 (1983) 29–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Shortliffe, E.H., Buchanan, B.G., Feigenbaum, E.A. Knowledge engineering for medical decision-making: a review of computer-based clinical decision aids. Proc. IEEE 67 (1979) 1207–1224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pople, H.E.: Heuristic methods for imposing structure on ill-structured problems: the structuring of medical diagnostics. In Szolovits, P. (Edit.): Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, pp. 119–190. ( AAAS Symposium Series). Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press 1982.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Szolovits, P., Pauker, S.G.: Computers and clinical decision making: whether, how, and for whom? Proc. IEEE. 67 (1979) 1224–1226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    McShane, D.J., Harlow, A., Kraines, R.G. et al. TOD: a software system for the ARAMIS data bank. Computer 12 (1979) 34–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Weyl, S., Fries, J., Wiederhold, G., Germano, F.: A modular self-describing clinical databank system. Comput. biomed. Res. 8 (1975) 279–293.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Starmer, C.F., Rosati, R.A., McNeer, J.F.: Databank use in management of chronic disease. Comput. biomed. Res. 7 (1974) 111–116.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rosati, R.A., McNeer, J.F., Starmer, C.F. et al.: A new information system for medical practice. Arch, intern. Med. 135 (1975) 1017–1024.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rosati, R.A., Lee, K.L., Califf, R.M. et al.: Problems and advantages of an observational database, approach to evaluating the effect of therapy on outcome. Circulation 65 ( Suppl. II ) (1982) 27–32.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lee, K.L.: Personal communication. Duke Cardiovascular Disease Databank, Sept. 1983.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Decker, J., McShane, D.J., Esdaile, J.M. et al.: The glossary for rheumatic disease. Amer. Rheum. Ass. 1. (1982) 1–95.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Follansbee, W.P., Steen, V.D., Gamble, W.H.: Cardiac involvement in progressive systemic sclerosis (pss) accessed by exercise and radionuclide technique. Abstract Arthr. Rheum. 25 (Suppl.) (1982) 5 ff.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Feigenbaum, P.A., Kraines, R.G., Medsger, T.A., Jr., Fries, J.F.: The variability of immunologic laboratory tests. J. Rheum. 9 (1982) 408–14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mitchell, D.M., Spitz, P.W., Young, D.Y.: Predictors of mortality in rheumatoid arthritis (ra). Arthr. Rheum. 25 (Suppl.) (1982) 5149 ff.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mitchell, D.M., Fries, J.F.: An analysis of the American Rheumatism Association criteria for rheumatoid arthritis. Arthr. Rheum. 25 (1982) 481–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Steen, V.D., Medsger, T.A., Jr., Rodnan, G.P.: D-penicillamine therapy in progressive systemic sclerosis (scleroderma). Ann. intern. Med. 97 (1982) 652–659.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Whiting-O’Keefe, Q.E., Henke, J.E., Riccardi, P.J. et al.: Recognition of information in renal biopsies of patients with lupus nephritis. Ann. intern. Med. 96 (1982) 718–723.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Whiting-O’Keefe, Q.E., Henke, J.E., Shearn, M.A. et al.: The information content from renal biopsy in systemic lupus erythematosus: stepwise linear regression analysis. Ann. intern. Med. 96 (1982) 723–727.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ginzier, E.M., Diamond, H.S., Weiner, M.: A multicenter study of outcome in systemic lupus erythematosus: I. Entry variables as predictors of prognosis. Arthr. Rheum. 2J5 (1982) 601–611.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rosner, S., Ginzier, E.M., Diamond, H.S. et al.: A multicenter study of outcome in systemic lupus erythematosus: II. Causes of death. Arthr. Rheum. 25 (1982) 612–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Fraker, T.D.Jr., Wagner, G.S., Rosati, R.A.: Extension of myocardial infarction: incidence and prognosis. Circulation 60 (1979) 1126–1129.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Harris, P.J., Lee, K.L., Behar, V.S. Outcome in treated coronary artery disease. Circulation 62 (1980) 718–726.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Harris, P.J., Harreil, F.E., Jr., Lee, K.L. et al.: Survival in medically treated coronary disease. Circulation 60 (1979) 1259–1269.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    McNeer, F.J., Margolis, J.R., Lee, K.L. et al.: The role of the exercise test in the evaluation of patients for ischemic heart disease. Circulation 57 (1978) 64–70.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    McNeer, J.F., Wallace, A.G., Wagner, G.S. et al.: The course of acute myocardial infarction: feasibility of early discharge in the uncomplicated patient. Circulation 51. (1975) 410–413.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Stiles, G.L., Rosati, R.A., Wallace, A.G.: Clinical relevance of S-T segment elevation. Amer. J. Cardiol. 46 (1980) 931–936.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Miller, R.A., Kapoor, W.N., Peterson, J.: The use of relational databases as a tool for conducting clinical studies. Forthcoming Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Symposium on Computer Applications in Medical Care, Baltimore, MD. IEEE Computer Society, October, 1983.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Oleson, C.E.: Personal communication, NSABP project. Sept. 1983.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wagner, G., Tautu, P., Wolber, U.: Problems of medical diagnosis - a bibliography. Meth. Inform. Med. 17 (1978) 55–74.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Shortliffe, E.H.: Computer-based medical consultations: MYCIN. New York: American Elsevier 1976.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Yu, V.L., Fagan, L.M., Wraith, S.M. et al.: Antimicrobial selection by computer. J. Amer. med. Ass. 242 (1979) 1279–1282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kulikowski, C.A., Weiss, S.: Representation of expert knowledge for consultation: the CASNET and EXPERT projects. In Szolovits, P. (Edit.): Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, pp. 21–25. ( AAAS Symposium Series). Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press 1982.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Weiss, S., Kulikowski, C.A., Safir, A.: Glaucoma consultation by computer. Comput. Biol. Med. 8 (1978) 24–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Pauker, S.G., Gorry, G.A., Kassirer, J.P. et al.: Towards the simulation of clinical cognition: taking a present illness by computer. Amer. J. Med. 60 (1976) 981–996.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Silverman, H.B.: A Comparative Study of Computer-Aided Clinical Diagnosis of Birth Defects. Masters Thesis, Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science. Cambrigde, Mass.: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science, January, 1981.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Miller, R.A., Pople, H.E., Jr., Myers, J.D.: lnternist-1, an experimental computer-based diagnostic consultant for general internal medicine. New Engl. J. Med. 307 (1982) 468–476.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Patil, R.S., Szolovits, P., Schwartz, W.B.: Modeling knowledge of the patient in acid-base and electrolyte disorders. In Szolovits, P. (Edit.): Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, pp. 191–226 ( AAAS Symposium Series). Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press 1982.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Patil, R.S.: Causal Representation of Patient Illness for Electrolyte and Acid-Base Diagnosis. PhD Thesis, Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science, October, 1981.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. A. Miller
    • 1
  1. 1.Decision Systems Laboratory, School of MedicineUniversity of PittsburgPittsburgUSA

Personalised recommendations