W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > July 2013

Re: Standards for inclusion/exclusion criteria ?

From: Michel Dumontier <michel.dumontier@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 09:43:58 +0200
Message-ID: <CALcEXf5R54BSniEi30ommscVE6-5FHA=rwP4PwT5RWOYyGV6cQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrea Splendiani <andrea.splendiani@iscb.org>
Cc: Kathrin Dentler <k.dentler@vu.nl>, HCLS <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
Google Scholar says:

http://scholar.google.ca/scholar?cites=18026669919486573499&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en

m.


On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 5:09 PM, Andrea Splendiani <
andrea.splendiani@iscb.org> wrote:

> HI,
>
> thanks and sorry for the late reply. I have been doing a bit of reading.
> Let's say I am up2date until more or less the date of your review (2007).
>
> First, I wonder if something new come out since then (rather than
> evolutions of approaches/standards already existing).
>
> Second, I got the impression that rationales to standardize clinical
> trials criteria vary a lot. Mining EHRs for candidates has different
> requirements from criteria re-use, which in turns has different
> requirements from (trials) discovery.
> I was looking for some sampling of criteria in use in clinical trials.
> Could not find anything (at least open). Does anybody have some pointer in
> this direction ?
>
>
> best,
> Andrea
>
>
>
> Il giorno 15/lug/2013, alle ore 07:21, Kathrin Dentler <k.dentler@vu.nl>
> ha scritto:
>
> > Hi Andrea,
> >
> > For a first broad overview, this paper is a good starting point:
> > Formal representation of eligibility criteria: A literature review
> > http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1532046409001592
> >
> > For CDISC, there is ongoing work on OWL/RDF formats:
> >
> http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/cancerlibrary/terminologyresources/cdisc
> > http://kerfors.blogspot.nl/2012/05/semantic-models-for-cdisc-based.html
> >
> > Best,
> > Kathrin
> >
> >
> >
> > Op 7/15/13 1:34 AM, Andrea Splendiani schreef:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I was wondering if somebody could provide some pointer to work going on
> in an area that is related to clinical trials: inclusion and exclusion
> criteria.
> >> (I have followed the recent thread on encoding Hamilton Disease and
> pointers).
> >>
> >> In, particular, I am interested in two things:
> >> Standards with substantial uptake (sub question: is CDISC's uptake
> actual or perspective ?).
> >>
> >> Modeling of inclusion/exclusion criteria, but with a particular twist:
> not modeling the questions, but the facts that are queried. Basically I am
> interested in modeling patients and conditions (to the level of detail
> required "usually" required by clinical trials). The subject itself can be
> very vast, but is there a framework which provides at least an upper
> perspective on how to model subjects's features, diseases, interventions,
> samples (also respect to time) ?
> >>
> >> Any pointer is welcome!
> >>
> >> best,
> >> Andrea Splendiani
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Kathrin Dentler
> >
> > AI Department         |   Department of Medical Informatics
> > Faculty of Sciences   |   Academic Medical Center
> > Vrije Universiteit    |   Universiteit van Amsterdam
> > k.dentler@vu.nl       |   k.dentler@amc.uva.nl
> >
> > http://www.few.vu.nl/~kdr250/
> >
> >
>
>
>


-- 
Michel Dumontier
Associate Professor of Bioinformatics, Carleton University
Chair, W3C Semantic Web for Health Care and the Life Sciences Interest Group
http://dumontierlab.com
Received on Tuesday, 23 July 2013 07:44:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:21:34 UTC