ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To enhance the Business Process Management (BPM)+ Healthcare language portfolio by incorporating knowledge types not previously covered and to improve the overall effectiveness and expressiveness of the suite to improve Clinical Knowledge Interoperability. METHODS: We used the BPM+ Health and Object Management Group (OMG) standards development methodology to develop new languages, following a gap analysis between existing BPM+ Health languages and clinical practice guideline knowledge types. Proposal requests were developed based on these requirements, and submission teams were formed to respond to them. The resulting proposals were submitted to OMG for ratification. RESULTS: The BPM+ Health family of languages, which initially consisted of the Business Process Model and Notation, Decision Model and Notation, and Case Model and Notation, was expanded by adding 5 new language standards through the OMG. These include Pedigree and Provenance Model and Notation for expressing epistemic knowledge, Knowledge Package Model and Notation for supporting packaging knowledge, Shared Data Model and Notation for expressing ontic knowledge, Party Model and Notation for representing entities and organizations, and Specification Common Elements, a language providing a standard abstract and reusable library that underpins the 4 new languages. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: In this effort, we adopted a strategy of separation of concerns to promote a portfolio of domain-agnostic, independent, but integrated domain-specific languages for authoring medical knowledge. This strategy is a practical and effective approach to expressing complex medical knowledge. These new domain-specific languages offer various knowledge-type options for clinical knowledge authors to choose from without potentially adding unnecessary overhead or complexity.
Subject(s)
Language , Motivation , Reference StandardsABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The use and interoperability of clinical knowledge starts with the quality of the formalism utilized to express medical expertise. However, a crucial challenge is that existing formalisms are often suboptimal, lacking the fidelity to represent complex knowledge thoroughly and concisely. Often this leads to difficulties when seeking to unambiguously capture, share, and implement the knowledge for care improvement in clinical information systems used by providers and patients. OBJECTIVES: To provide a systematic method to address some of the complexities of knowledge composition and interoperability related to standards-based representational formalisms of medical knowledge. METHODS: Several cross-industry (Healthcare, Linguistics, System Engineering, Standards Development, and Knowledge Engineering) frameworks were synthesized into a proposed reference knowledge framework. The framework utilizes IEEE 42010, the MetaObject Facility, the Semantic Triangle, an Ontology Framework, and the Domain and Comprehensibility Appropriateness criteria. The steps taken were: 1) identify foundational cross-industry frameworks, 2) select architecture description method, 3) define life cycle viewpoints, 4) define representation and knowledge viewpoints, 5) define relationships between neighboring viewpoints, and 6) establish characteristic definitions of the relationships between components. System engineering principles applied included separation of concerns, cohesion, and loose coupling. RESULTS: A "Multilayer Metamodel for Representation and Knowledge" (M*R/K) reference framework was defined. It provides a standard vocabulary for organizing and articulating medical knowledge curation perspectives, concepts, and relationships across the artifacts created during the life cycle of language creation, authoring medical knowledge, and knowledge implementation in clinical information systems such as electronic health records (EHR). CONCLUSION: M*R/K provides a systematic means to address some of the complexities of knowledge composition and interoperability related to medical knowledge representations used in diverse standards. The framework may be used to guide the development, assessment, and coordinated use of knowledge representation formalisms. M*R/K could promote the alignment and aggregated use of distinct domain-specific languages in composite knowledge artifacts such as clinical practice guidelines (CPGs).
Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care , Electronic Health Records , Humans , SemanticsABSTRACT
Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG), meant to express best practices in healthcare, are commonly presented as narrative documents communicating care processes, decision making, and clinical case knowledge. However, these narratives in and of themselves lack the specificity and conciseness in their use of language to unambiguously express quality clinical recommendations. This impacts the confidence of clinicians, uptake, and implementation of the guidance. As important as the quality of the clinical knowledge articulated, is the quality of the language(s) and methods used to express the recommendations. In this paper, we propose the BPM+ family of modeling languages as a potential solution to this challenge. We present a formalized process and framework for translating CPGs into a standardized BPM+ model. Further, we discuss the features and characteristics of modeling languages that underpin the quality in expressing clinical recommendations. Using an existing CPG, we defined a systematic series of steps to deconstruct the CPG into knowledge constituents, assign CPG knowledge constituents to BPM+ elements, and re-assemble the parts into a clear, precise, and executable model. Limitations of both the CPG and the current BPM+ languages are discussed.
