- From: Skinner, Karen (NIH/NIDA) [E] <kskinner@nida.nih.gov>
- Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 16:41:51 -0400
- To: <samwald@gmx.at>, "Waclaw Kusnierczyk" <Waclaw.Marcin.Kusnierczyk@idi.ntnu.no>
- Cc: <phismith@buffalo.edu>, <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
This discussion on "evidence" makes me wonder if "inclusion" or "exclusion" criteria for a study are considered as "evidence" or are they something else? For example, if "smokers" are to be excluded from a study, a definition of a "smoker" must exist, and then an interpretation of whether the subject satisfies the definition must exist. In the "Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence", the subject is evaluated with respect to a series of questions, each of which requires its own "evaluation." http://ww2.heartandstroke.ca/DownloadDocs/PDF/Fagerstrom_Test.pdf Is there a definition for "evidence" that applies to any aspects of this situation, and if so, what would it be? Karen Skinner -----Original Message----- From: samwald@gmx.at [mailto:samwald@gmx.at] Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 3:53 PM To: Waclaw Kusnierczyk Cc: phismith@buffalo.edu; public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org Subject: Re: Evidence Hi Waclaw, > Matthias, if you look carefully at BFO, you'll see that roles are > entities. This means that evidences, as roles, are entities. Of course. I just wanted to differentiate that an experiment is not an instance of any class called 'evidence' (in other words, an experiment 'is not' evidence). Instead, it should be associated with an 'evidence-role'. cheers, Matthias cheers, Matthias Samwald ---------- Yale Center for Medical Informatics, New Haven / Section on Medical Expert and Knowledge-Based Systems, Vienna / http://neuroscientific.net -- Psssst! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört? Der kanns mit allen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger
Received on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 20:42:55 UTC