Skip to main content
PMC home page
Proceedings of the Annual Symposium on Computer Application in Medical Care logoLink to Proceedings of the Annual Symposium on Computer Application in Medical Care
. 1995:851–857.

Contextual models of clinical publications for enhancing retrieval from full-text databases.

G P Purcell 1, E H Shortliffe 1
PMCID: PMC2579214  PMID: 8563412

Abstract

Conventional methods for retrieving information from the medical literature are imprecise and inefficient. Information retrieval systems employ unmanageable indexing vocabularies or use full-text representations that overwhelm the user with irrelevant information. This paper describes a document representation designed to improve the precision of searching in textual databases without significantly compromising recall. The representation augments simple text word representations with contextual models that reflect recurring semantic themes in clinical publications. Using this representation, a searcher may indicate both the terms of interest and the contexts in which they should occur. The contexts limit the potential interpretations of text words, and thus form the basis for more precise searching. In this paper, we discuss the shortcomings of traditional retrieval systems and describe our context-based representation. Improved retrieval performance with contextual models is illustrated by example, and a more extensive study is proposed. We present an evaluation of the contextual models as an indexing scheme, using a variation of the traditional inter-indexer consistency experiments, and we demonstrate that contextual indexing is reproducible by minimally trained physicians and medical students.

Full text

PDF
851

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Bailar J. C., 3rd, Louis T. A., Lavori P. W., Polansky M. A classification for biomedical research reports. N Engl J Med. 1984 Dec 6;311(23):1482–1487. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198412063112305. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Covell D. G., Uman G. C., Manning P. R. Information needs in office practice: are they being met? Ann Intern Med. 1985 Oct;103(4):596–599. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-103-4-596. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group Evidence-based medicine. A new approach to teaching the practice of medicine. JAMA. 1992 Nov 4;268(17):2420–2425. doi: 10.1001/jama.1992.03490170092032. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Funk M. E., Reid C. A. Indexing consistency in MEDLINE. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1983 Apr;71(2):176–183. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Haynes R. B., Mulrow C. D., Huth E. J., Altman D. G., Gardner M. J. More informative abstracts revisited. Ann Intern Med. 1990 Jul 1;113(1):69–76. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-113-1-69. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Hayward R. S., Wilson M. C., Tunis S. R., Bass E. B., Rubin H. R., Haynes R. B. More informative abstracts of articles describing clinical practice guidelines. Ann Intern Med. 1993 May 1;118(9):731–737. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-118-9-199305010-00012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Hersh W. R., Greenes R. A. Information retrieval in medicine: state of the art. MD Comput. 1990 Sep-Oct;7(5):302–311. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Hersh W. R., Hickam D. H. A comparison of retrieval effectiveness for three methods of indexing medical literature. Am J Med Sci. 1992 May;303(5):292–300. doi: 10.1097/00000441-199205000-00004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Huth E. J. Structured abstracts for papers reporting clinical trials. Ann Intern Med. 1987 Apr;106(4):626–627. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-106-4-626. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Landis J. R., Koch G. G. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977 Mar;33(1):159–174. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. McKibbon K. A., Haynes R. B., Dilks C. J., Ramsden M. F., Ryan N. C., Baker L., Flemming T., Fitzgerald D. How good are clinical MEDLINE searches? A comparative study of clinical end-user and librarian searches. Comput Biomed Res. 1990 Dec;23(6):583–593. doi: 10.1016/0010-4809(90)90042-b. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. McKinin E. J., Sievert M., Johnson E. D., Mitchell J. A. The Medline/full-text research project. J Am Soc Inf Sci. 1991 May;42(4):297–307. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199105)42:4<297::AID-ASI6>3.0.CO;2-M. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Mitchell J. A., Johnson E. D., Hewett J. E., Proud V. K. Medical students using Grateful Med: analysis of failed searches and a six-month follow-up study. Comput Biomed Res. 1992 Feb;25(1):43–55. doi: 10.1016/0010-4809(92)90034-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Mulrow C. D., Thacker S. B., Pugh J. A. A proposal for more informative abstracts of review articles. Ann Intern Med. 1988 Apr;108(4):613–615. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-108-4-613. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Stross J. K., Harlan W. R. Dissemination of relevant information on hypertension. JAMA. 1981 Jul 24;246(4):360–362. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Stross J. K., Harlan W. R. The dissemination of new medical information. JAMA. 1979 Jun 15;241(24):2622–2624. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Williamson J. W., German P. S., Weiss R., Skinner E. A., Bowes F., 3rd Health science information management and continuing education of physicians. A survey of U.S. primary care practitioners and their opinion leaders. Ann Intern Med. 1989 Jan 15;110(2):151–160. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-110-2-151. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Woolf S. H., Benson D. A. The medical information needs of internists and pediatricians at an academic medical center. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1989 Oct;77(4):372–380. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Proceedings of the Annual Symposium on Computer Application in Medical Care are provided here courtesy of American Medical Informatics Association

RESOURCES