Logical Ontology for Mediating between Nursing Intervention Terminology Systems

Summary

Objectives: Several researchers have proposed the use of logical ontologies as ‘reference terminologies’. However, there are a number of unresolved issues. This article describes the development of a logical ontology for nursing interventions and presents the results of evaluation.

Methods: Initially this study involved the development in GRAIL of two separate experimental ontologies: an ontology based on the textual content of informal definitions for nursing interventions drawn from the Nursing Interventions Classification; and an ontology based on labels for the same nursing interventions. Following initial bench-testing, the ontology based on labels was selected for extension (to accommodate also nursing intervention components of the Home Health Care Classification System and the Omaha System), for further testing and for external evaluation.

Results: A hierarchy of nursing interventions generated automatically from the experimental ontology based on informal definitions contained only 3 hierarchical relationships, compared to 214 for the initial ontology based on labels. For the final extended ontology based on labels, the generated hierarchy contained the three source terminology systems in entirety - there were a total of 2861 hierarchical relationships. While the results of comparative bench testing of the final ontology were favourable, the results of external evaluation were mixed and showed little agreement between reviewers.

Conclusion: This study suggests that while a logical ontology based on labels might be a useful tool for mediating between nursing intervention terminology systems, a formative consensus type development methodology might improve the approach by helping to harmonise ideological differences that may exist across the nursing profession.

Keywords

Nursing - terminology - classification

• References

• 1 Spackman K, Campbell K, Cote R. SNOMED RT: A Reference Terminology for Health Care. In: Masys D. editor AMIA 1997; Annual Symposium. Nashville: Hanley & Belfus, Inc.; 1997: 640-4.
• 2 Hardiker N, Rector A. Structural Validation of Nursing Terminologies. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 2001; 8 (Suppl. 03) 212-21.
• 3 Chute C. Standards Move to Center Stage. MD Computing 1999; 16 (Suppl. 01) 29-32.
• 4 Masarie F, Miller R, Bouhaddou O, Giuse N, Warner H. An Interlingua for Electronic Interchange of Medical Information: Using Frames to Map Between Clinical Vocabularies. Computers and Biomedical Research 1991; 24 (Suppl. 04) 379-400.
• 5 McCormick K, Lang N, Zielstorff R, Mil-holland K, Saba V, Jacox A. Toward Standard Classification Schemes for Nursing Language: Recommendations of the American Nurses Association Steering Committee on Databases to Support Clinical Nursing Practice. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 1994; 1: 421-7.
• 6 Kim M, McFarland G, McLane A. Pocket Guide to Nursing Diagnoses. 5th ed. St. Louis: Mosby-Year Book Inc.; 1993
• 7 McCloskey J, Bulechek G. Nursing Interventions Classification. 2nd ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 1996
• 8 Martin K, Scheet N. The Omaha System: a pocket guide for Community Health Nursing. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company; 1992
• 9 Saba V. Home Health Care Classification of Nursing Diagnoses and Interventions. Washington D.C.: Georgetown University; 1994
• 10 www.ana.org/nidsec/nilang.htm.
• 11 Ozbolt JG, Russo M, Stultz MP. Validity and Reliability of Standard Terms and Codes for Patient Care Data. In: Gardner RM. editor. 19th Annual Symposium on Computer Applications in Medical Care. Hanley & Belfus Inc.; 1995: 37-41.
• 12 Henry S, Holzemer W, Reilly C, Campbell K. Terms used by nurses to describe patient problems: can SNOMED III represent nursing concepts in the patient record?. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 1994; 1: 61-74.
• 13 Rector A, Rossi-Mori A, Consorti F, Zanstra P. Practical development of re-useable terminologies: GALEN-IN-USE and the GALEN Organisation. International Journal of Medical Informatics 1998; 48: 71-84.
• 14 Rector A, Bechofer S, Goble C, Horrocks I, Nowlan W, Solomon W. The GRAIL concept modelling language for medical terminology. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine 1997; 9: 139-71.
• 15 Rogers J, Solomon W, Rector A, Pole P, Zanstra P, van der Haring E. Rubrics to Dissections to GRAIL. In: Pappas C, Maglaveras N, Scherrer J-R. editors. Medical Informatics Europe (MIE 97). Thessaloniki, Greece: IOS Press; 1997: 241-5.
• 16 Rector A, Solomon W, Nowlan W, Rush T, Zanstra P, Claassen W. A Terminology Server for Medical Language and Medical Information Systems. Methods of Information in Medicine 1995; 34: 147-57.
• 17 Hardiker N, Webber B, Markert K, Rauch B. Supporting the development of formal models of nursing terminology. In: Proceedings of Nursing Informatics;. Aukland: 2000
• 18 Campbell K, Oliver D, Shortliffe E. The Unified Medical Language System: toward a collaborative approach for solving terminologic problems. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 1998; 5 (Suppl. 01) 12-6.
• 19 Levy D, Dolin R, Mattison J, KA S, KE C. Computer-facilitated collaboration: experiences building SNOMED-RT. In: Chute C. editor. A Paradigm Shift in Health Care Information Systems. Clinical Infrastructures for the 21st Century; 1998: 870-4.
• 20 Coiera E. When Conversation Is Better Than Computation. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 2000; 7 (Suppl. 03) 277-86.
• 21 Zielstorff RD, Hudgings CI, Grobe SJ. Next-Generation Nursing Information Systems: Essential Characteristics for Professional Practice. Washington, DC: American Nurses Publishing; 1993