Clinical guidelines aim to eliminate clinician errors, reduce practice variation, and promote best medical practices. Computer-interpretable guidelines (CIGs) can deliver patient-specific advice during clinical encounters, which makes them more likely to affect clinician behavior than narrative guidelines. To reduce the number of errors that are introduced while developing narrative guidelines and CIGs, we studied the process used by the ACP-ASIM to develop clinical algorithms from narrative guidelines. We analyzed how changes progressed between subsequent versions of an algorithm and between a narrative guideline and its derived clinical algorithm. We recommend procedures that could limit the number of errors produced when generating clinical algorithms. In addition, we developed a tool for authoring CIGs in GLIF3 format and validating their syntax, data type matches, cardinality constraints, and structural integrity constraints. We used this tool to author guidelines and to check them for errors.
|Original language||English (US)|
|Number of pages||5|
|Journal||Proceedings / AMIA ... Annual Symposium. AMIA Symposium|
|State||Published - 2002|
ASJC Scopus subject areas