Biomedical Informatics – A Confluence of Disciplines?

A. Hasman; E. Ammenwerth; H. Dickhaus; P. Knaup; C. Lovis; J. Mantas; V. Maojo; F. J. Martin-Sanchez; M. Musen; V. L. Patel; G. Surjan; J. L. Talmon; I. N. Sarkar

doi:10.3414/ME11-06-0003

Methods of Information in Medicine, Table of Contents

Methods Inf Med 2011; 50(06): 508-524
DOI: 10.3414/ME11-06-0003

Original Articles

Schattauer GmbH

Biomedical Informatics – A Confluence of Disciplines?

Authors

A. Hasman

¹Department of Medical Informatics, AMC-University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
E. Ammenwerth

²UMIT – University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Hall in Tirol. Austria
H. Dickhaus

³Institute of Medical Biometry and Informatics, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
P. Knaup

³Institute of Medical Biometry and Informatics, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
C. Lovis

⁴Division of Medical information sciences, University hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
J. Mantas

⁵Health Informatics Laboratory, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
V. Maojo

⁶Biomedical Informatics Group, Universidad Politecnica de Madrid, Spain
F. J. Martin-Sanchez

⁷Melbourne Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, Melbourne, Australia
M. Musen

⁸Stanford Center for Biomedical Informatics Research, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
V. L. Patel

⁹Center for Cognitive Studies in Medicine and Public Health, New York Academy of Medicine, New York, USA
G. Surjan

¹⁰National Institute for Strategic Health Research, Budapest, Hungary
J. L. Talmon

¹¹Center for Research, Innovation, Support and Policy, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
I. N. Sarkar

¹²Center for Clinical and Translational Science; Department of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics, and Department of Computer Science, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, USA

Abstract

Summary

Background: Biomedical informatics is a broad discipline that borrows many methods and techniques from other disciplines.

Objective: To reflect a) on the character of biomedical informatics and to determine whether it is multi-disciplinary or inter-disciplinary; b) on the question whether biomedical informatics is more than the sum of its supporting disciplines and c) on the position of biomedical informatics with respect to related disciplines.

Method: Inviting an international group of experts in biomedical informatics and related disciplines on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of Methods of Information in Medicine to present their viewpoints.

Results and Conclusions: This paper contains the reflections of a number of the invited experts on the character of biomedical informatics. Most of the authors agree that biomedical informatics is an interdisciplinary field of study where researchers with different scientific backgrounds alone or in combination carry out research. Biomedical informatics is a very broad scientific field and still expanding, yet comprised of a constructive aspect (designing and building systems). One author expressed that the essence of biomedical informatics, as opposed to related disciplines, lies in the modelling of the biomedical content. Interdisciplinarity also has consequences for education. Maintaining rigid disciplinary structures does not allow for sufficient adaptability to capitalize on important trends nor to leverage the influences these trends may have on biomedical informatics. It is therefore important for students to become aware of research findings in related disciplines. In this respect, it was also noted that the fact that many scientific fields use different languages and that the research findings are stored in separate bibliographic databases makes it possible that potentially connected findings will never be linked, despite the fact that these findings were published. Bridges between the sciences are needed for the success of biomedical informatics.

Keywords

Biomedical informatics - bioinformatics - health informatics - multidisciplinarity - interdisciplinarity - education

Full Text

References

References
1 Chen H, Fuller S, Friedman C, Hersh W. (eds). Knowledge management and data mining in biomedicine. Springer; 2005
2 Coiera E. Guide to health information. 2nd ed. London: Arnold; 2003
3 von Bertalanffy L. General System Theory : foundations, development, applications. London: The Pinguin Press; 1971
4 Fitzsimmons WE. Multiple drug interactions. Hospital Therapy 1989; 14 (Suppl. 02) 51-60.
5 Barabási AL, Gulbahce N, Loscalzo J. Network medicine: a network-based approach to human disease. Nat Rev Genet 2011; 12 (Suppl. 01) 56-68.
6 Barabási AL. Linked: How Everything Is Connected to Everything Else and What it Means for Business, Science, and Everyday Life. New York, London: Pinguin Group; 2002
7 Schrödinger E. What is life?. McMillan; 1946. Available at Cambridge University Press, 1992, ISBN 978-0521427081.
8 Arndt M, Juffmann T, Vedral V. Quantum physics meets biology. HFSP J 2009; 3 (Suppl. 06) 386-400.
9 Collini E, Wong CY, Wilk KE, Curmi PM, Brumer P, Scholes GD. Coherently wired light-harvesting in photosynthetic marine algae at ambient temperature. Nature 2010; 463 7281 644-647.
10 Nagel ZD, Klinman JP. A 21st century revisionist’s view at a turning point in enzymology. Nat Chem Biol 2009; 5 (Suppl. 08) 543-550.
11 Meyer MP, Klinman JP. Investigating Inner-Sphere Reorganization via Secondary Kinetic Isotope Effects in the C-H Cleavage Reaction Catalyzed by Soybean Lipoxygenase: Tunneling in the Substrate Backbone as Well as the Transferred Hydrogen. J Am Chem Soc 2010 (Epub ahead of print.)
12 Callaham M, Wears RL, Weber E. Journal prestige, publication bias, and other characteristics associated with citation of published studies in peer-reviewed journals. JAMA 2002; 287 (Suppl. 21) 2847-2850.
13 Wang H, Ding Y, Tang J, Dong X, He B, Qiu J, Wild DJ. Finding Complex Biological Relationships in Recent PubMed Articles Using Bio-LDA. PLoS One 2011; 6 (Suppl. 03) e17243.
14 Bernstam EV, Smith JW, Johnson TR. What is biomedical informatics?. J Biomed Inform 2010; 43: 104-110.
15 Haux R. Medical informatics: Past, present, and future. Int J Med Inform 2010; 21: 599-610.
16 Mantas E, Ammenwerth E, Demeris A. et al. Recommendations of the International Medical Informatics Association (IMIA) on Education in Biomedical and Health Informatics. First Revision. Methods Inf Med 2010; 49: 105-120.
17 http://www.amia.org/biomedical-informatics-core-competencies (accessed August 2, 2011)
18 Musen MA. Medical informatics: Searching for underlying components. Methods Inf Med 2002; 41: 12-19.
19 Rubin DL, Shah NH, Noy NF. Biomedical ontologies: a functional perspective. Briefings in Bioinformatics 2007; 9 (Suppl. 01) 75-90.
20 Shah NH, Musen MA. Ontologies for formal representation of biological systems. In: Studer S, Staab S. (eds). Handbook on Ontologies. New York: Springer-Verlag: 2009. pp 445-462
21 Chandrasekaran B, Johnson TR, Smith JW. Task structure analysis for knowledge modeling. Communications of the ACM 1992; 33 (Suppl. 09) 124-136.
22 O’Connor MJ, Nyulas C, Tu SW, Buckeridge DL, Okhmatovskaia A, Musen MA. Software-engineering challenges of building and deploying reusable problem solvers. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis, and Manufacturing 2009; 23: 339-356.
23 Mellor SJ. MDA Distilled: Principles of Model-Driven Architecture. Boston: Addison-Wesley; 2004
24 Crubézy M, Motta E, Lu W, Musen MA. Configuring online problem-solving resources with the Internet Reasoning Service. IEEE Intelligent Systems 2003; 2 (Suppl. 02) 34-42.
25 Martin-Sanchez et al. (2008) A primer in knowl edge management for Nanoinformatics in Medicine”. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Knowledge-Based Intelligent Information & Engineering Systems KES2008. IOS-Press; 2008
26 Altman RB, Balling R, Brinkley JF, Coiera E, Consorti F, Dhansay MA, Geissbuhler A, Hersh W, Kwankam SY, Lorenzi NM, Martin-Sanchez F, Mihalas GI, Shahar Y, Takabayashi K, Wiederhold G. Commentaries on Informatics and medicine: from molecules to populations. Methods Inf Med 2008; 47 (Suppl. 04) 296-317.
27 Seipel M. Interdisciplinarity: An Introduction. Kirksville, Missouri: Truman State University; 2009
28 Rafols I, Porter AL, Leydesdorff L. Science overlay maps: a new tool for research policy and library management. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology 2010; 61 (Suppl. 09) 1871-1887.
29 Harris J. The Case for Cross-Disciplinary Approaches in International Development. World Development 2002; 30.3: 487-496.
30 Henry S. Disciplinary hegemony meets interdisciplinary ascendancy: Can interdisciplinary/integrative studies survive, and if so how?. Issues in Integrative Studies 2005; 23: 1-37.
31 Shannon CE, Weaver W. Mathematical Theory of Communication. University of Illinois Press; 1963
32 Blois M. Information and Medicine: The Nature of Medical Descriptions. Berkeley CA: Univ of California Press; 1984
33 Maojo V, Kulikowski C. Medical informatics and bioinformatics: integration or evolution through scientific crises?. Methods Inf Med 2006; 45 (Suppl. 05) 474-482.
34 Kulikowski CA. The micro-macro spectrum of medical informatics challenges: from molecular medicine to transforming health care in a globalizing society. Methods Inf Med 2002; 41 (Suppl. 01) 20-24.
35 Kohane IS. Bioinformatics and clinical informatics: the imperative to collaborate. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2000; 7 (Suppl. 05) 512-516.
36 Martin-Sanchez F, Iakovidis I, Nørager S, Maojo V, de Groen P, Van der Lei J, Jones T, Abraham-Fuchs K, Apweiler R, Babic A, Baud R, Breton V, Cinquin P, Doupi P, Dugas M, Eils R, Engelbrecht R, Ghazal P, Jehenson P, Kulikowski C, Lampe K, De Moor G, Orphanoudakis S, Rossing N, Sarachan B, Sousa A, Spekowius G, Thireos G, Zahlmann G, Zvárová J, Hermosilla I, Vicente FJ. Synergy between medical informatics and bioinformatics: facilitating genomic medicine for future health care. J Biomed Inform 2004; 37 (Suppl. 01) 30-42.
37 Maojo V, Kulikowski CA. Bioinformatics and medical informatics: collaborations on the road to genomic medicine?. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2003; 10 (Suppl. 06) 515-522.
38 Kim BY, Rutka JT, Chan WC. Nanomedicine. N Engl J Med 2010; 363 (Suppl. 25) 2434-2443.
39 Jain K. The handbook of Nanomedicine. NJ: Humana Press; 2008. pp 161-192.
40 Maojo V, Martin-Sanchez F, Kulikowski C. et al. Nanoinformatics and DNA-based computing: catalyzing nanomedicine. Pediatr Res 2010; 67 (Suppl. 05) 481-489.
41 National Science Foundation.. Nanoinformatics 2010: A Collaborative Roadmaping Workshop. November 3-5, 2010. Arlington, Virginia (USA): Available from http://nanotechinformatics.org Last access: February 2011
42 Maojo V, García Remesal M, de la Iglesia D, Crespo J, Pérez-Rey D, Chiesa S, Fritts M, Kulikowski CA. Nanoinformatics: developing advanced informatics applications for nanomedicine. In: Prokov A, (ed). Intracellular Delivery: Fundamentals and Applications (Fundamental Biomedical Technologies). NY: Springer; 2011
43 Maojo V, De la Iglesia D, García-Remesal M, Martín-Sánchez F. et al. Nanoinformatics in Europe: The ACTION-Grid White Paper. Proceedings of Nanoinformatics 2010. Arlington (Virginia, EEUU).: November 3-5 2010
44 Maojo V, Martín-Sánchez F. et al. The ACTION-Grid White Paper: Linking Biomedical Informatics, Grid Computing and Nanomedicine (2010). Available from: http://www.action-grid.eu/index.php?url=whitepaper Last access: June 2011
45 De la Iglesia D, Maojo V, Chiesa S. et al. International efforts in nanoinformatics research applied to nanomedicine. Methods Inf Med 2011; 50 (Suppl. 01) 84-95.
46 Kay L. Who Wrote the Book of Life: A History of the Genetic Code. Stanford Univ Press; 2000
47 Friedman CP. A “fundamental theorem” of biomedical informatics. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2009; 16 (Suppl. 02) 169-170.
48 Smith B, Ashburner M, Rosse C. et al. The OBO Foundry: coordinated evolution of ontologies to support biomedical data integration. Nat Biotechnol 2007; 25 (Suppl. 11) 1251-1255.
49 Smith B, Ceusters W. Ontological realism: A methodology for coordinated evolution of scientific ontologies. Appl Ontol 2010; 5 3–4 139-188.
50 Maojo V, Crespo J, García-Remesal M. et al. Biomedical Ontologies: Toward Scientific Debate. Methods Inf Med 2011 50. 03
51 Brochhausen M, Burgun A, Ceusters W, Hasman A, Leong TY, Musen M, Oliveira JL, Peleg M, Rector A, Schulz S. Discussion of “biomedical ontologies: toward scientific debate”. Methods Inf Med 2011; 50 (Suppl. 03) 217-236.
52 Greenes RA, Shortliffe EH. Biomedical informatics: an emerging academic discipline and institutional priority. JAMA 1990; 263: 1114-1120.
53 Hasman A, Safran C. A new name, a new scope. Int J Med Inform 1997 44. 01
54 Ledley RS, Lusted LB. Reasoning foundations of medical diagnosis. Science 1959; 130: 9-21.
55 Patel VL, Kaufman DR. Biomedical informatics and the Science of Cognition. J Am Biomed Inform Assoc 1998; 5: 493-502.
56 Patel VL, Kaufman DR. Science and Practice: A Case for Biomedical informatics as a Local Science of Design. J Am Biomed Inform Assoc 1998; 5: 489-492.
57 Clark HH, Brennan SE. Grounding in communication. In: Clark HH. (ed). Using Language. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press; 1996. pp 127-149.
58 Horsky J, Kuperman GJ, Patel VL. Comprehensive analysis of a medication dosing error related to CPOE: A case report. JAMIA 2005; 12: 377-382.
59 Bloomrosen M, Starren J, Lorenzi NM, Ash JS, Patel VL, Shortliffe EH. Anticipating and addressing the unintended consequences of health IT and policy: a report from the AMIA 2009 Health Policy Meeting. J Am Biomed Inform Assoc 2011; 18 (Suppl. 01) 82-90.
60 Cimino JJ, Clayton PD, Hripcsak G, Johnson SB. Knowledge-based approaches to the maintenance of a large controlled medical terminology. JAMIA 1994; 1 (Suppl. 01) 35-50.
61 Carroll JM. Human–computer interaction: psychology as a science of design. Annu Rev Psychol 1997; 48: 61-83.
62 Patel VL, Yoskowitz NA, Arocha JF, Shortliffe EH. Cognitive and Learning Sciences in Biomedical and Health Instructional Design: A Review with Lessons for Biobiomedical informatics Education. J Biomed Inform 2009; 42 (Suppl. 01) 176-197.
63 van Bemmel JH. Medical informatics, art or science?. Methods Inf Med 1996; 35 (Suppl. 03) 157-172. discussion 73-201.
64 Han YY, Carcillo JA, Venkataraman ST, Clark RS, Watson RS, Nguyen TC. et al. Unexpected increased mortality after implementation of a commercially sold computerized physician order entry system. Pediatrics 2005; 116 (Suppl. 06) 1506-1512.
65 Ammenwerth E, Shaw N. Bad health informatics can kill – is evaluation the answer?. Methods Inf Med 2005; 44: 1-3.
66 Ammenwerth E, Brender J, Nykänen P, Prokosch H-U, Rigby M, Talmon J. Visions and strategies to improve evaluation of health information systems – reflections and lessons based on the HIS-EVAL workshop in Innsbruck. Int J Med Inform 2004; 73 (Suppl. 06) 479-491.
67 EC.. Council Directive 93/42/EEC and 2007/47/EC concerning medical devices. http://eur-lex.europa eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CONSLEG: 1993L0042:20071011:en:PDF. 2007
68 Friedman CF, Haug P. Report on conference track 5: evaluation metrics and outcome. Int J Med Inform 2003; 69 2–3 307-309.
69 Ammenwerth E, de Keizer N. A viewpoint on evidence-based health informatics, based on a pilot survey on evaluation studies in health care informatics. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2007; 14 (Suppl. 03) 368-371.
70 Rigby M, Ammenwerth E, Talmon J, Nykänen P, Brender J, De Keizer N. Increasingly dispersed innovative technologies require even greater trust: Promoting evidence-based Health Informatics. IMIA Yearbook 2011
71 Ammenwerth E, de Keizer N. An inventory of evaluation studies of information technology in health care: Trends in evaluation research 1982-2002. Methods Inf Med 2005; 44: 44-56.
72 Del Beccaro MA, Jeffries HE, Eisenberg MA, Harry ED. Computerized provider order entry implementation: no association with increased mortality rates in an intensive care unit. Pediatrics 2006; 118 (Suppl. 01) 290-295.
73 Ammenwerth E, Talmon J, Ash JS, Bates DW, Beuscart-Zephir MC, Duhamel A. et al. Impact of CPOE on mortality rates--contradictory findings, important messages. Methods Inf Med 2006; 45 (Suppl. 06) 586-593.
74 Kijsanayotin B, Pannarunothai S, Speedie SM. Factors influencing health information technology adoption in Thailand‘s community health centers: applying the UTAUT model. Int J Med Inform 2009; 78 (Suppl. 06) 404-416.
75 Yu P, Li H, Gagnon MP. Health IT acceptance factors in long-term care facilities: a cross-sectional survey. Int J Med Inform 2009; 78 (Suppl. 04) 219-229.
76 Koppel R, Metlay J, Cohen A, Abaluck B, Localio A, SE K. et al. Role of computerized physician order entry systems in facilitating medication errors. JAMA 2005; 293 (Suppl. 10) 1197-2003.
77 Beuscart-Zéphir M, Elkin P, Pelayo S, Beuscart R. The human factors engineering approach to biomedical informatics projects: state of the art, results, benefits and challenges. Yearb Med Inform 2007 pp 109-127.
78 Various authors.. Medical informatics: Art of science?. Methods Inf Med 1996; 35: 155-201.
79 Nagm F, Cecez-Kecmanovic D, Kennan MA. Is project evaluation methodology – Science or Art?. In: Newell S, Whitley E, Pouloudi N, Wareham J, Mathiassen L editors. Information Systems in a globalising world: Challenges, Ethics and Practice ECIS 2009, 17th European Conference on Information Systems Verona: June 8-10 2009
80 Ammenwerth E, Schreier G, Hayn D. Health informatics meets eHealth. Methods Inf Med 2010; 49 (Suppl. 03) 269-270.
81 Blobel B, Zvarova J. eHealth: combining health telematics, telemedicine, biomedical engineering and bioinformatics to the edge. Methods Inf Med 2010; 49 (Suppl. 02) 121-122.
82 Kouematchoua Tchuitcheu G, Rienhoff O. Options for diabetes management in sub-Saharan Africa with an electronic medical record system. Methods Inf Med 2011; 50 (Suppl. 01) 11-22.
83 Bisbal J, Berry D. An analysis framework for electronic health record systems. Interoperation and collaboration in shared healthcare. Methods Inf Med 2011; 50 (Suppl. 02) 180-189.
84 Kimura M, Nakayasu K, Ohshima Y, Fujita N, Nakashima N, Jozaki H. et al. SS-MIX: A Ministry Project to Promote Standardized Healthcare Information Exchange. Methods Inf Med 2011; 50 (Suppl. 02) 131-139.
85 Dogac A, Yuksel M, Avci A, Ceyhan B, Hulur U, Eryilmaz Z. et al. Electronic health record interoper-ability as realized in the Turkish health information system. Methods Inf Med 2011; 50 (Suppl. 02) 140-149.
86 Alsos OA, Dabelow B, Faxvaag A. Doctors’ Concerns of PDAs in the Ward Round Situation. Lessons from a Formative Simulation Study. Methods Inf Med 2011; 50 (Suppl. 02) 190-200.
87 Bachlin M, Plotnik M, Roggen D, Giladi N, Hausdorff JM, Troster G. A wearable system to assist walking of Parkinson s disease patients. Methods Inf Med 2010; 49 (Suppl. 01) 88-95.
88 Song B, Wolf KH, Gietzelt M, Al Scharaa O, Tegtbur U, Haux R. et al. Decision support for teletraining of COPD patients. Methods Inf Med 2010; 49 (Suppl. 01) 96-102.
89 Thew SL, Sutcliffe A, de Bruijn O, McNaught J, Procter R, Jarvis P. et al. Supporting Creativity and Appreciation of Uncertainty in Exploring Geo-coded Public Health Data. Methods Inf Med 2011; 50 (Suppl. 02) 158-165.
90 Best W. Use of a digital electronic computer for evaluation of serial clinical observations in patients with acute leukemia. Methods Inf Med 1962; 1 (Suppl. 02) 56-62.
91 Yoder RD, Swearingen DR, Schenthal JE, Sweeney JW, Nettleton WJ. An automated clinical information system. Methods Inf Med 1964; 3 (Suppl. 02) 45-50.
92 Prokosch HU, Ganslandt T. Perspectives for Medical Informatics: Reusing the electronic medical record for clinical research. Methods Inf Med 2009 48. 01
93 Chuang LY, Yang CS, Wu KC, Yang CH. Correlation-based gene selection and classification using Taguchi-BPSO. Methods Inf Med 2010; 49 (Suppl. 03) 254-268.
94 Rector AL. Clinical Terminology: Why Is it so Hard?. Methods Inf Med 1999; 38: 239-252.
95 Cimino JJ. High-quality, Standard, Controlled Healthcare Terminologies Come of Age. Methods Inf Med 2011; 50 (Suppl. 02) 101-104.
96 Davies FD. User acceptance of information technology: system characteristics, user perception, and behavioural impact. Int J Man-Machine Studies 1993 factors for failure or success 38: 475-487
97 Bronzino J. Biomedical Engineering: A historical perspective. In: Enderle J, Blanchard S, Bronzino J editors. Introduction to Biomedical Engineering. Burlington MA: Elsevier Academic Press; 2005
98 Lindberg DAB. The computer and medical care. Springfield, Illinois: Thomas; 1968
99 Handels H, Ehrhardt J. Medical image computing for computer-supported diagnostics and therapy. Methods Inf Med 2009; 48: 11-17.
100 Matthews PM, Honey GD, Bullmore ET. Applications of fMRI in translational medicine and clinical practice. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 2006; 7: 732-744.
101 Cai W, Chen X. Multimodality Molecular Imaging of Tumor Angiogenesis. J Nucl Med 2008; 49: 113-128.
102 Zilberman M. Active Implants and Scaffolds for tissue regeneration. Berlin: Springer; 2011
103 Hakim N. Artificial Organs. London: Springer; 2009. 104. Musen MA, Shahar Y, Shortliffe EH Clinical decision-support systems. In: Shortliffe EH, Cimino JJ editors. Biomedical Informatics. New York: Springer; 2006
105 Hulot JS. Pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine: lost in translation?. Genome Medicine 2010; 2: 13-16.
106 Kohn DB, Candotti F. Gene therapy fulfilling its promise. N Engl J Med 2009; 360: 518-521.
107 Kulikowski CA, Kulikowski CW. Biomedical and health informatics in translational medicine. Methods Inf Med 2009; 48: 4-10.
108 Kedar U, Phutane P, Shidhaye S, Kadam V. Advances in polymeric micelles for drug delivery and tumor targeting. Nanomedicine 2010; 6 (Suppl. 06) 714-729.
109 van Bemmel JH. Medical Informatics is interdisciplinary avant la lettre. Methods Inf Med 2008; 47: 318-321.
110 de Boer BA, Soufan AT, Hagoort J, Mohun TJ, van den Hoff MJ, Hasman A, Voorbraak FP, Moorman AF, Ruijter JM. The interactive presentation of 3D information obtained from reconstructed datasets and 3D placement of single histological sections with the 3D portable document format. Development 2011; 138 (Suppl. 01) 159-164.
111 Musen MA. Medical informatics: searching for underlying components. Methods Inf Med 2002; 41 (Suppl. 01) 12-19.