Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Computer-assisted test interpretation: Considerations in patient care

  • Articles
  • Published:
Journal of Medical Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Computer-assisted test interpretation (CATI) is a set of developing technologies designed to support medical decision-making. This paper develops a taxonomy of computer-assisted test interpretation, giving specific consideration to the characteristics of the data that are to be interpreted, the nature of the interpretive task, the expected involvement of the health professional in the generation of the interpretation, the inference mechanism used for the interpretation, and the broader context of the interpretation. We go on to examine potential benefits and disadvantages of CATI systems in terms of accuracy, information management, interpretation time, patient management, medical communication, and expense. Finally, we examine electrocardiogram interpretation systems from the perspective of this taxonomy, and offer suggestions regarding areas of further inquiry into the effects of CATI on medical care.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Federal Register. Department of Health and Human Services,Health Care Finan. Admin. 56(227): 1991.

  2. Davis, M., Validation of computer software in process control applications.J. Parenter. Sci. Technol. 40:18–24, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Miller, R.A., and Masarie, F.J., The demise of the ‘Greek Oracle’ model for medical diagnostic systems.Methods Inf. Med. 29:1–2, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Zatti, M., Guidi, G., and Marcolini, F., Computer assisted laboratory diagnosis: a ten-year experience.Int. J. Biomed. Comput. 23:125–135, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bessette, F., and Nguyen, L., Automated electrocardiogram analysis: the state of the art.Med. Inf. (Lond.). 14:43–51, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Davey, B.L., Fright, W.R., Carroll, G.J., and Jones, R.D., Expert system approach to detection of epileptiform activity in the EEG.Med. Biol. Eng. Comput. 27:365–370, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Boston, J.R., Automated interpretation of brainstem auditory evoked potentials: a prototype system.Ieee Trans. Biomed. Eng. 36:528–532, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Banks, G., Vries, J.K., and McLinden, S., Radiologic automated diagnosis (RAD).Comput. Methods Progr. Biomed. 25:157–167, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  9. du Boulay, G.H., Teather, D., Morton, B.A., Wills, K.M., Innocent, P.R., and Plummer, D., Brains—a computer advisor system to aid in CT scan interpretation and cerebral disease diagnosis.Neuroradiology. 29:196–199, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Getty, D.J., Pickett, R.M., D'Orsi, C.J., and Swets, J.A., Enhanced interpretation of diagnostic images.Invest. Radiol. 23:240–252, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Lampeter, W.A., and Wandtke, J.C., Computerized search of chest radiographs for nodules.Invest. Radiol. 21:384–390, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  12. O'Connor, M.L., and McKinney, T., The diagnosis of microcytic anemia by a rule-based expert system using VP-Expert.Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 113:985–988, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Barnett, G.C., Cimino, J.J., Hopp, J.A.,et al. DXplain: An evolving diagnostic decision support system.JAMA 258:67–74, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Jamieson, P.W., Computerized interpretation of electromyographic data.Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 75:392–400, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Keel, B.A., Durfee, K.K., and Cho, S., A microcomputer data base system for maternal serum alpha fetoprotein screening programmed in BASIC.J. Perinat. Med. 17:221–229, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Wong, D.T., and Knaus, W.A., Predicting outcome in critical care: the current status of the APACHE prognostic scoring system.Can. J. Anaesth. 38(3):374–383, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Loughlin, J.F., Leung, F.Y., and Henderson, A.R., Classification of hyperlipoproteinaemias by computer interpretation.Ann. Clin. Biochem. 21:326–331, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Shortliffe, E.H., Buchanan, B.G., and Feigenbaum, E.A., Knowledge engineering for medical decision making: A review of computer-based clinical decision aids.Proc. IEEE. 67:1207–1224, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Reggia, J.A., and Tuhrim, S.,An Overview of Methods for Computer-Assisted Medical Decision Making. New York: Springer Verlag, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  20. van Waeg, G., Groth, T., Niklasson, F., and de Verdier, C.H., Alloparinol kinetics in humans as a means to assess liver function: comparison of different models.Am. J. Physiol. 253:R352–360, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Hlatky, M.A., Using databases to evaluate therapy.Stat. Med. 10(4):647–652, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hlatky, M.A., Califf, R.M., Harrell, F.E.,et al. Comparison of predictions based on observational data with the results of randomized controlled clinical trials of coronary bypass surgery.J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 11(2):237–245, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Frauenhoffer, C.M., and Urban, C.H., Hepatitis profile interpretation by microcomputer.Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 84:366–370, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Macfarlane, P.W., A brief history of computer-assisted electrocardiography.Methods Inf. Med. 29:272–81, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Willems, J.L., Abreu-Lima, C., Arnaud, P.,et al. Effect of combining electrocardiographic interpretation results on diagnostic accuracy.Eur. Heart J. 9:1348–1355, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Thomson, A., Mitchell, S., and Harris, P., Computerized electrocardiographic interpretation: An analysis of clinical utility in 5110 electrocardiograms.Med. J. Aust. 151: 1989.

  27. Grauer, K., Kravitz, L., Ariet, M., Curry, R.W., Nelson, W.P., and Marriott, H.J.L., Potential benefits of a computer ECG interpretation system for primary care physicians in a community hospital.J. Am. Bd. Fam. Pract. 2:17–24, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Kudenchuk, P.J., Ho, M.T., Weaver, W.D.,et al. Accuracy of computer-interpreted electrocardiography in selecting patients for thrombolytic therapy.J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 17:1486–1491, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Willems, J.L., Abreu-Lima, C., van Bemmel, J.H.,et al. The diagnostic performance of computer programs for the interpretation of electrocardiograms.N. Engl. J. Med. 325:1767–1773, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Pipberger, H.V., McCaughan, D., Littmann, D.,et al. Clinical application of a second generation electrocardiographic computer program.Am. J. Cardiol. 35:597–608, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Alcover, I.A., Henning, R.J., Jackson, D.L., A computer-assisted monitoring system for arrhythmia detection in a medical intensive care unit.Crit. Care. Med. 12:888–891, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Feldman, R., Hillson, S.D., and Wingert, T., Measuring the components of physician work, under review.

  33. Sridharan, M.R., and Flowers, N.C., Computerized electrocardiographic analysis.Mod. Conc. Cardiovasc. Dis. 53:37–41, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Rios, J., Sandquist, F., Ramseth, D., Stratbucker, R., Drazen, E., and Hanmer, J., Cost-Effectiveness of the electrocardiogram.Am. J. Cardiol. 41:175–183, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Drazen, E., Mann, N., Borun, R., Laks, M., Bersen, A., Survey of computer-assisted electrocardiography in the United States.J. Electrocardiol. Suppl:S98-S104, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Young, F.E., Validation of medical software: present policy of the Food and Drug Administration.Ann. Intern. Med. 106:628–629, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Norton, M.L., and Norton, E.V., Medical computers from the manufacturer's viewpoint.Comput. Methods Progr. Biomed. 25:229–236, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Brannigan, V., The regulation of medical computer software as a ‘device’ under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.Comput. Methods Progr. Biomed. 25:219–228, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. From the Department of Medicine, Ramsey Clinic and Institute for Health Services Research, University of Minnesota, 55455, Minneapolis, Minnesota

    Steven D. Hillson & Donald P. Connelly

  2. the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Division of Health Computer Sciences, University of Minnesota, 55455, Minneapolis, Minnesota

    Steven D. Hillson & Donald P. Connelly

Authors
  1. Steven D. Hillson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Donald P. Connelly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

This work was supported entirely by federal funds from HCFA Cooperative Agreement 99-C-99169/5-03, at a total cost of $49,931. The statements contained in this paper are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Health Care Financing Administration.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hillson, S.D., Connelly, D.P. Computer-assisted test interpretation: Considerations in patient care. J Med Syst 16, 195–205 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01000272

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01000272

Keywords

Search

Navigation