Form Follows Function

Model-Driven Engineering for Clinical Trials
  • Jim Davies
  • Jeremy Gibbons
  • Radu Calinescu
  • Charles Crichton
  • Steve Harris
  • Andrew Tsui
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7151)

Abstract

We argue that, for certain constrained domains, elaborate model transformation technologies—implemented from scratch in general-purpose programming languages—are unnecessary for model-driven engineering; instead, lightweight configuration of commercial off-the-shelf productivity tools suffices. In particular, in the CancerGrid project, we have been developing model-driven techniques for the generation of software tools to support clinical trials. A domain metamodel captures the community’s best practice in trial design. A scientist authors a trial protocol, modelling their trial by instantiating the metamodel; customized software artifacts to support trial execution are generated automatically from the scientist’s model. The metamodel is expressed as an XML Schema, in such a way that it can be instantiated by completing a form to generate a conformant XML document. The same process works at a second level for trial execution: among the artifacts generated from the protocol are models of the data to be collected, and the clinician conducting the trial instantiates such models in reporting observations—again by completing a form to create a conformant XML document, representing the data gathered during that observation. Simple standard form management tools are all that is needed. Our approach is applicable to a wide variety of information-modelling domains: not just clinical trials, but also electronic public sector computing, customer relationship management, document workflow, and so on.

Keywords

Customer Relationship Management Trial Protocol Consort Statement Software Artifact Form Completion 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Blair, T.: Modernising government. UK Cabinet Office white paper CM 4310, UK Government (March 1999), http://www.archive.official-documents.co.uk/document/cm43/4310/4310.htm
  2. 2.
    Brenton, J., Caldas, C., Davies, J., Harris, S., Maccallum, P.: CancerGrid: Developing open standards for clinical cancer informatics. In: UK E-Science All Hands Meeting (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brenton, J., Davies, J., Gibbons, J., Harris, S.: Accelerating cancer research using semantics-driven technology. In: Microsoft eScience Workshop (December 2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brooks Jr., F.P.: The Mythical Man-Month. Addison-Wesley (1975)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Calinescu, R.: Model-based SOA generation for cancer clinical trials. In: Skar, L.A., Bjerkestrand, A.A. (eds.) OOPSLA Workshop on Service-Oriented Architectures, Portland, Oregon, pp. 57–71 (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Calinescu, R., Harris, S., Gibbons, J., Davies, J., Toujilov, I., Nagl, S.: Model-driven architecture for cancer research. In: Software Engineering and Formal Methods, pp. 59–68 (September 2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    CancerGrid website, http://www.cancergrid.org/
  8. 8.
  9. 9.
    Cong, G., Fan, W., Jia, X., Ma, S.: PRATA: A system for XML publishing, integration and view maintenance. In: UK e-Science All Hands Meeting, pp. 432–435 (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Crichton, C., Davies, J., Gibbons, J., Harris, S., Shukla, A.: Semantic frameworks for e-Government. In: Pardo, T., Janowski, T. (eds.) International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (ICEGOV), pp. 30–39 (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Crichton, C., Davies, J., Gibbons, J., Harris, S., Shukla, A., Tsui, A.: Semantics-driven development for electronic government applications. In: HICSS Workshop on Electronic Government (2009)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Crichton, C., Davies, J., Gibbons, J., Harris, S., Tsui, A., Brenton, J.: Metadata-driven software for clinical trials. In: ICSE Workshop on Software Engineering in Health Care. IEEE (May 2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Davies, J., Gibbons, J., Harris, S., Metz, J., Pollard, A.J., Snape, M.: Model-driven support for a vaccine study in Kathmandu. In: Microsoft eScience Workshop (2009)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Davies, J., Gibbons, J., Harris, S., Warzel, D.: Evolving health informatics: Semantic frameworks and metadata-driven architectures. In: Microsoft eScience Workshop (2008)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Davies, J., Harris, S., Crichton, C., Shukla, A., Gibbons, J.: Metadata standards for semantic interoperability in electronic government. In: International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Earl, H.: Neo-tAnGo: A neoadjuvant study of sequential epirubicin + cyclophosphamide and paclitaxel ± gemcitabine in the treatment of high risk early breast cancer with molecular profiling, proteomics and candidate gene analysis (2007) iSRCTN 78234870, http://public.ukcrn.org.uk/search/StudyDetail.aspx?StudyID=1229
  17. 17.
    Fegan, G.W., Lang, T.A.: Could an open-source clinical trial data-management system be what we have all been looking for? PLoS Medicine 5(3) (March 2008)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fowler, M.: Domain Specific Languages. Addison Wesley (2010)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Harris, S., Calinescu, R.: CancerGrid clinical trials model 1.1. Tech. Rep. MRC/1.4.1.3, CancerGrid (2006), http://www.cancergrid.org/index.php?option=com_remository&func=fileinfo&id=185
  20. 20.
    ISO/IEC JTC1 SC32 WG2: ISO/IEC,11179, Information technology—metadata registries, http://metadata-standards.org/11179/
  21. 21.
    Kush, R.: Can the protocol be standardised? Tech. rep., Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium (2006)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    McLaren, I., Wicks, T.: Developing generative frameworks using XML. In: Automated Software Engineering, pp. 368–372 (2001)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mellor, S.J., Balcer, M.: Executable UML: A Foundation for Model-Driven Architecture. Addison-Wesley (2002)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Microsoft: InfoPath website, http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/infopath/
  25. 25.
    Microsoft: XML Schema Definition Tool (Xsd.exe) (2009), http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/x6c1kb0sVS.80.aspx
  26. 26.
    Miller, J., Mukerji, J.: Model driven architecture: A technical perspective. Tech. Rep. ormsc/2001-07-01, Object Management Group (July 2001)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Moher, D., Schulz, K., Altman, D.G.: The CONSORT statement: Revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials. The Lancet, 357 (April 2001)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Poole, C., Earl, H.: NEAT: National breast cancer study of epirubicin plus CMF versus classical CMF adjuvant therapy (2001) iSRCTN 42625759, http://public.ukcrn.org.uk/search/StudyDetail.aspx?StudyID=643
  29. 29.
    Poole, C., Howard, H., Dunn, J.: tAnGo: A phase III randomized trial of gemcitabine in paclitaxel-containing, epirubicin-based adjuvant chemotherapy for women with early stage breast cancer (2004) iSRCTN 51146252, http://public.ukcrn.org.uk/search/StudyDetail.aspx?StudyID=661
  30. 30.
    Sierra, J.L., Fernández-Valmayor, A., Fernández-Manjón, B.: A document-oriented paradigm for the construction of content-intensive applications. Computer Journal 49(5), 562–584 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Steele, G.L.: Objects have not failed, position statement for OOPSLA panel (2002)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Stell, A., Sinnott, R., Ajayi, O.: Supporting the clinical trial recruitment process through the grid. In: UK e-Science All Hands Meeting, pp. 61–68 (2006)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sullivan, L.: The tall office building artistically considered. Lippincott’s Magazine (March 1896)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    University of Birmingham School of Medicine: How Birmingham researchers are taking a measured look at medical treatments. Medlines 4 (July 1997), http://www.publications.bham.ac.uk/medlines/1997b/a_medpg3.htm
  35. 35.
    US National Cancer Institute: caCORE software development kit (2006), http://ncicb.nci.nih.gov/infrastructure/cacoresdk
  36. 36.
    US National Cancer Institute: Cancer Biomedical Informatics Grid (2006), https://cabig.nci.nih.gov/
  37. 37.
    Wong, P.Y.H., Gibbons, J.: A process-algebraic approach to workflow specification and refinement. In: Software Composition (2007)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wong, P.Y.H., Gibbons, J.: On Specifying and Visualising Long-Running Empirical Studies. In: Vallecillo, A., Gray, J., Pierantonio, A. (eds.) ICMT 2008. LNCS, vol. 5063, pp. 76–90. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wong, P.Y.H., Gibbons, J.: Formalisations and applications of BPMN. Science of Computer Programming 76, 633–650 (2011)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Wong, P.Y.H., Gibbons, J.: Property specifications for workflow modelling. Science of Computer Programming 76(10), 942–967 (2011)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jim Davies
    • 1
  • Jeremy Gibbons
    • 1
  • Radu Calinescu
    • 2
  • Charles Crichton
    • 1
  • Steve Harris
    • 1
  • Andrew Tsui
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK
  2. 2.Computer Science Research GroupAston UniversityBirminghamUK

Personalised recommendations