4.6 Article

Evolutionary rule decision using similarity based associative chronic disease patients

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10586-014-0376-x

关键词

Data Mining; Clinical decision support system; Chronic disease patients; Telemedicine; U-Healthcare; IT convergence

资金

  1. Industrial Strategic technology development program - Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy (MI, Korea) [10037283]
  2. Korea Evaluation Institute of Industrial Technology (KEIT) [10037283] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Efficient healthcare management has increasingly drawn much attention in healthcare sector along with recent advances in IT convergence technology. Population aging and a shift from an acute to a chronic disease with a long duration of illness have urgently necessitated healthcare service for efficient, systematic health management. Clinical decision support system (CDSS) is an integrated healthcare system that effectively guides health management and promotion, recommendation for regular health check-up, tailor-made diet therapy, health behavior change for self-care, alert service for drug interaction in patients with chronic diseases with a high prevalence. Although CDSS rule-based algorithm aids guidelines and decision making according to a single chronic disease, it is unable to inform unique characteristics of each chronic disease and suggest preventive strategies and guidelines of complex diseases. Therefore, this study proposes evolutionary rule decision making using similarity based associative chronic disease patients to normalize clinical conditions by utilizing information of each patient and recommend guidelines corresponding detailed conditions in CDSS rule-based inference. Decision making guidelines of chronic disease patients could be systematically established according to various environmental conditions using database of patients with different chronic diseases.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据