Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW)

, Volume 18, Issue 1, pp 83–108 | Cite as Ontological Context for Data Use and Integration

  • Nadine SchuurmanEmail author
  • Ellen Balka


Increasingly powerful computers and increased emphasis on evidence based decision making are creating a demand for merging and integrating data from different sources into a single data set. The demand for data is outstripping our ability to ensure data integrity, and sometimes analysis is performed on data that are not appropriate for the purposes they are used for. Here we describe problems that arise when data from different sources are merged, and we suggest that one way to add context to data so that users can make informed decisions about their ontological context is through ontology-based metadata. Examples of the problem are taken from health data with emphasis on difficulties in standardizing Emergency Room wait times. We describe eight fields that can be used to capture contextual metadata. These fields are captured using ethnographic methods from users and database stewards who frequently understand precisely how context and institutional usage have shaped interpretation of semantic fields. We argue that attaching a portable archive of ontological context to travel with data—based on information from users and developers—is a means of ensuring that data are integrated and compared in multiple contexts with greater integrity and more robust results.

Key words

data integration data quality health informatics indicators ontology semantic interoperability 


  1. Armstrong, P., H. Armstrong and D. Coburn (2001): Unhealthy Times: Political Economy Perspectives on Health and Care in Canada. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Balka, E. (2003a): Getting the Big Picture: The Macro-politics of Information System Development (and Failure) in a Canadian Hospital. Methods of Information in Medicine, vol. 42(4), pp. 324–330.Google Scholar
  3. Balka, Ellen (2003b): The Role of Technology in Making Gender Count on the Health Information Highway. Atlantis, vol. 27(2), pp. 49–56.Google Scholar
  4. Balka, E. (2004): Fragmented Views from the Field: Reflections on Field Observations of Computerized Health Sector Work. In E. Balka and I. Wagner (eds): Proceedings, Work Practice Research and Information Technology Development in Hospitals and Community Health Care Settings. Workshop Held in Conjunction with CSCW 2004, Chicago Il., Nov. 7 pp. 7–12 New York: ACM.Google Scholar
  5. Balka, E. (2005): The Production of Health Indicators as Computer Supported Cooperative Work: Reflections on the Multiple Roles of Electronic Health Records. In E. Balka and I. Wagner (eds): Reconfiguring Healthcare: Issues in Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Healthcare Environments. Workshop Organized by Ellen Balka & Ina Wagner European Computer Supported Cooperative Work Conference, September 19 2005, (pp. 67–75). Paris, France.Google Scholar
  6. Balka, E., P. Bjorn and I. Wagner (2008). Steps Toward a Typology for Health Informatics. Computer Supported Cooperative Work. (CSCW 08) (in press).Google Scholar
  7. Balka, E., M. Doyle-Waters, D. Lecznarowicz and J.M. FitzGerald (2007): Technology, Governance and Patient Safety: Systems Issues in Technology and Patient Safety. International Journal of Medical Informatics, vol. 76(Supplement 1), pp. S48–S57. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2006.05.038.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Balka, E. and S. Whitehouse (2007): Whose Work Practice? Situating an Electronic Triage System within a Complex System. In E. Coiera, J.I. Westbrook, J.L. Callen and J. Aarts (eds): Information Technology in Health Care 2007: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Information Technology in Health Care. Socio-technical Approaches Vol. 130 Studies in Health Technology and Informatics. Amsterdam: IOS, pp. 59–74.Google Scholar
  9. Bisby, F.A. (2000): The Quiet Revolution: Biodiversity Informatics and the Internet. Science, vol. 289, pp. 2309–2312. doi: 10.1126/science.289.5488.2309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bishr, Y.A. (1997): Semantic Aspects of Interoperable GIS. Spatial Information. Enschede, The Netherlands, International Institute for Aerospace Survey and Earth Sciences (ITC).Google Scholar
  11. Bishr, Y.A. (1998): Overcoming the Semantic and Other Barriers to GIS Interoperability. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, vol. 12, pp. 299–314. doi: 10.1080/136588198241806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bishr, Y.A., H. Pundt, W. Kuhn and M. Radwan (1999): Probing the Concept of Information Communities—A First Step Toward Semantic Interoperability. In M.F. Goodchild, M. Egenhofer, R. Fegeas and C. Kottman (eds): Interoperating Geographic Information Systems. Boston: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  13. Bittner, T. and G. Edwards (2001): Towards an Ontology for Geomatics. Geomatica, vol. 55, pp. 475–490.Google Scholar
  14. Bjorn, P. and E. Balka (2007): Health Care Categories have Politics Too: Unpacking the Managerial Agendas of Electronic Triage Systems. In L.J. Bannon, I. Wagner, C. Gutwin, R.H.R. Harper and K. Schmidt (eds): ECSCW 2007: Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work pp. 371–390 London: Springer.Google Scholar
  15. Bowker, G.C. and S.L. Star (2000): Sorting Things Out: Classification and its Consequences. Cambridge, MA: MIT.Google Scholar
  16. Brodaric, B. and J. Hastings (2002): An Object Model for Geologic Map Information. Joint International Symposium on Geospatial Theory, Processing and Applications. Ottawa, Canada: ISPRS Commission IV.Google Scholar
  17. Brodeur, J., Y. Bedard, G. Edwards and B. Moulin (2003): Revisiting the Concept of Geospatial Data Interoperability Within the Scope of the Human Communication Processes. Transactions in GIS, vol. 7, pp. 243–265. doi: 10.1111/1467-9671.00143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Burrough P.A. (1996): Natural Objects with Indeterminate Boundaries. In P.A. Burrough and A.U. Frank (eds): Geographic Objects with Indeterminate Boundaries. Bristol, PA: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  19. Calgary Health Region Newslink, Emergency Department Operational Overview. (2005): (3/8/2005).
  20. Canadian Institute of Health Information (CIHI). (2003, February). Data Quality Documentation: Discharge Abstract Databases 2001–2003. Ottawa: CIHI. (Also available at; viewed online Dec. 16, 2004.
  21. Canada NewsWire (2004): MEDIA ADVISORY – Canada’s Emergency Physicians Want First Minister to Address ED. Wait Times, Canada NewsWire: Ottawa: September 9, 2004, pg. 1.Google Scholar
  22. Capital Health (2004): 10-point Plan for System Improvement: Emergency Overcrowding & Long Waits for Hospital Services. (3/8/2004).
  23. Chan, B., M. Schull and S. Schultz (2001): Emergency Department Services in Ontario 1993–2000. Toronto: Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences.Google Scholar
  24. Chrisman, N. (1999): Trading Zones of Boundary Objects: Understanding Incomplete Translations of Technical Expertise. Intersections: Society, Technology, and Geographic Thought, an Invited Workshop on GIS. Rough River Resort, Kentucky.Google Scholar
  25. Cuthbert, A. (1999): OpenGIS: Tales from a Small Market Town. In A. Vckovski, K.E. Brassel and H.J. Schek (eds): Interoperating Geographic Information Systems, 1580 ed. Zurich, Switzerland: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fabrikant, S.I. (2000): Spatialized Browsing in Large Data Archives. Transactions in GIS, vol. 4, pp. 65–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fonseca, F. (2004): An Algebraic Specification of Geo-ontologies for Interoperability. International Journal of Geographical Information Science.Google Scholar
  28. Fonseca, F.T., M.J. Egenhofer, P. Agouris and G. Camara (2002): Using Ontologies for Integrated Information Systems. Transactions in GIS, vol. 6, pp. 231–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Frank, A.U. and M. Raubal (1998): Specifications for Interoperability: Formalizing Image Schemata for Geographic Space. In T.K. Poiker and N. Chrisman (eds): Proceedings from the 8th International Symposium on Spatial Data Handling.Google Scholar
  30. Fujimura, J. (1992): Crafting Science: Standardized Packages, Boundary Objects, and “Translation”. In A. Pickering (ed): Science as Practice and Culture. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  31. Gerson, E. (1989): Personal Communication Cited in Schmidt, K. and Bannon, L.J., (1992). Taking CSCW Seriously: Supporting Articulation Work. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, vol. 1(1–2), pp. 7–40.Google Scholar
  32. Giuffre, M. (2005): Progress is Being Made...But There is a Long Way to Go, Vital Signs January, 2005, pp. 4–5. (3/8/2005).
  33. Government of Alberta (2002): Alberta’s Health System: Some Performance Indicators. December 2002 Technical Notes. Viewed August 5, 2005.
  34. Guardian (2005): Saskatoon Senior Waits 52 Hours in Emergency. Guardian. Charlottetown, P.E.I.: June 4, 2005. pg. A. 11.Google Scholar
  35. Harvey, F. (2003): The Linguistic Trading Zones of Semantic Interoperability. In D. Unwin (ed): Re-presenting GISLondon: Wiley.Google Scholar
  36. Harvey, F. and N.R. Chrisman (1998): Boundary Objects and the Social Construction of GIS Technology. Environment & Planning A, vol. 30, pp. 1683–1694 doi: 10.1068/a301683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Harvey, F., W. Kuhn, H. Pundt and Y. Bishr (1999): Semantic Interoperability: A Central Issue for Sharing Geographic Information. The Annals of Regional Science, vol. 33, pp. 213–232. doi: 10.1007/s001680050102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kirkey, S. (2005): Heart Patients Dying in Hospital Emergency Departments [Final Edition], The Vancouver Province, Nov. 26, 2004, p. A.13.Google Scholar
  39. Kottman, C. (1999): The Open GIS Consortium and Progress Toward Interoperability in GIS. In M. Goodchild, M. Egenhofer, R. Fegeas and C. Kottman (eds): Interoperating Geographic Information Systems. Boston: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  40. Kuhn, W. (2002): Modeling the Semantics of Geographic Categories through Conceptual Integration. In M.J. Egenhofer and D.M. Mark (eds): Geographic Information Science. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  41. Laurini, R. (1998): Spatial Multi-database Topological Continuity and Indexing: A Step Towards Seamless GIS Data Interoperability. Geographical Information Science, vol. 12, pp. 373–402. doi: 10.1080/136588198241842.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Longley, P.A., M.F. Goodchild, D.J. Maguire and D.W. Rhind (eds) (2001): Geographical Information Systems and Science. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  43. McIntosh, T. (2005): The taming of the Queue II, Colloquim Report, March 31 and April 1, 2005, Ottawa: Westin Hotel.Google Scholar
  44. National Ambulatory Care Reporting System (NACRS) (2005): General data limitations. March 2005. Ottawa.–2004_EN.pdf.
  45. Ottawa Hospital (2004): The Ottawa Hospital Performance Indicator Report. For period ending December 31, 2004. Viewed August 5, 2005.
  46. Peuquet, D. (1983): A Hybrid Structure for the Storage and Manipulation of very Large Spatial Data Sets. Computer Vision Graphics and Image Processing, vol. 24, pp. 14–27. doi: 10.1016/0734-189X(83)90018-X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Reid R. J., M. Barer, R. McKendry, K. McGrail, B. Prosser, Green B., et al. (2004): Patient-focused care over time: issues related to measurement, prevalence, and strategies for improvement among patient populations. Paper presented for and published by the Canadian Health Services Research Foundation. July 2003. (32 pages) CHSPR 2004:22R. Viewed August 2, 2005.
  48. Schmidt, K. and L.J. Bannon (1992): Taking CSCW Seriously: Supporting Articulation Work. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, vol. 1(1–2), pp. 7–40. doi: 10.1007/BF00752449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Schuurman N. (1999): Critical GIS: Theorizing an Emerging Discipline. Cartographica, vol. 36(1), Monograph 53.Google Scholar
  50. Schuurman, N. (2002): Flexible Standardization: Making Interoperability Accessible to Agencies with Limited Resources. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, vol. 29, pp. 343–353. doi: 10.1559/152304002782008350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Schuurman, N. (2004a): GIS: A Short Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  52. Schuurman, N. (2004b): Social Perspectives on Semantic Interoperability: Constraints to Geographical Knowledge from a Database Perspective. In F. Harvey and M.-P. Kwan (eds): Reconstructing GIS: Critical Perspectives. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Schuurman, N. (2005): Social Perspectives on Semantic Interoperability: Constraints on Geographical Knowledge from a Data Perspective. Cartographica, vol. 40, p. 47.Google Scholar
  54. Schuurman N. (2008): Database Ethnographies. Using Social Science Methodologies to Enhance Data Analysis and Interpretation. Geography Compass. (in press).Google Scholar
  55. Schuurman, N. and A. Leszczynski (2008): A Method to Map Heterogeneity Between Near But Non-equivalent Semantic Attributes in Multiple Health Data Registries. Health Informatic Journal, vol. 14, pp. 39–57.Google Scholar
  56. Schuurman, N. and A. Leszczynski (2006): Ontology-based Metadata. Transactions in Geographic Information Science, vol. 10(5), pp. 709–726.Google Scholar
  57. Sharman, Z. (2007): Remembering the Basics: Administrative Technology and Nursing Care in a Hospital Emergency Department. International Journal of Medical Informatics, vol. 76(Supplement 1), pp. S222–S228.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  58. Sheth, A.P. (1999): Changing Focus on Interoperability in Information Systems: From System, Syntax, Structure to Semantics. In M.F. Goodchild, M. Egenhofer, R. Fegeas and C. Kottman (eds): Interoperating Geographic Information Systems. Boston: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  59. Sin, L. (2005): Kelowna Hospital Trial Helps Clear ED Backlog: DIAGNOSTIC WORK: Nurses Help Cut Wait Times, [Final Edition], The Vancouver Province, May 22, 2005, pg. A.25.Google Scholar
  60. Star S.L. and J.R. Griesemer (1989): Institutional Ecology, ‘Translations’, and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39. Social Studies of Science, vol. 19(3), pp. 387– 420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Stein J.G. (2001): The Cult of Efficiency. (CBC Massey Lectures Series). House of Anansi:Toronto.Google Scholar
  62. Steyn, M. (2004): Bad Things Come to Those Who Wait. From C Difficile to SARS, Almost All Scandals in Canadian Hospitals Boil Down to The Same Thing: Sick People Waiting Longer in Crowded Rooms in Dirtier Hospitals, Western Standard, Nov. 22, 2004, p. 69.Google Scholar
  63. Timmermans S. and M. Berg (2003): The Gold Standard. The Challenge of Evidence-based Medicine and Standardization in Health Care. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  64. University Health Network (2005): University Health Network Wait Time Report Wait Time Summary. April 2005 (5/8/2005).
  65. Vckovski, A. (1999): Interoperability and Spatial Information Theory. In M.F. Goodchild, M. Egenhofer, R. Fegeas and C. Kottman (eds): Interoperating Geographic Information Systems. Boston: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  66. Wiener, C. (2000): Elusive Quest: Accountability in Hospitals (Social Problems and Social Issues). Sommerset, NJ: Aldine Transaction.Google Scholar
  67. Woods, D. (1992): The Power of Maps. New York: Guildford.Google Scholar
  68. Wooton, A. (1975): Dilemmas of Discourse: Controversies About Sociolinguistic.Google Scholar
  69. Young, M. (2005): RIH Adds Staff to Cope with Emergency Waits; [Final Edition], Kamloops Daily News, Apr. 22, 2005, pg. A.5.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Geography, RCB 7123Simon Fraser UniversityBurnabyCanada
  2. 2.School of CommunicationSimon Fraser UniversityBurnabyCanada

Personalised recommendations