Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Journal of Digital Imaging logoLink to Journal of Digital Imaging
. 2000 Feb;13(2):55–59. doi: 10.1007/BF03168369

Integration of computer-assembled digital images and text data as evidence for the oncological record

J M Liu 1,2,3,✉, H W Wu 1,2,3, W S Chen 1,2,3, W C Lin 1,2,3, Y Chao 1,2,3, W Y Lui 1,2,3, J Whang-Peng 1,2,3
PMCID: PMC3453196  PMID: 10843250

Abstract

Digitally created visual images of pertinent patient data have been integrated with text information to formulate a visual evaluation and summary sheet (VESS) using computer processing. The VESS incorporates images of a patient’s physical appearance, radiological images, pharmacokinetic graphs, and text information into a 1-page document of the patient’s condition. Thus, computer processing of digital images and other information helps to refine patient data presentation, analysis, interpretation, and communication. This form of data management is especially valuable in oncological research, where clinical trials demand rapid, ongoing assessment of results and analysis of large amounts of data. The VESS is an effective mechanism for monitoring both the progress of individual patients and the endpoints of the overall clinical trial.

Key Words: digital image, audit, medical record, evidence-based medicine

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (2.8 MB).

Footnotes

Supported by the Chen Shuyi Foundation.

References

  • 1.Sackett DL, Rosenberg WMC, Gray JAM, et al. Evidence-based medicine: What it is and what it isn’t: It’s about integrating individual clinical expertise and the best external evidence Br Med J 199631271–72.8555924 [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Barnett GO, Winickoff R, Dorsey JL, et al. Quality assurance through automated monitoring and concurrent feedback using a computer based medical information system. Med Care. 1978;16:962–970. doi: 10.1097/00005650-197811000-00007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Hunt DL, Haynes RB, Hanna SE, et al. Effects of computer-based clinical decision support systems on physician performance and patient outcomes. JAMA. 1998;280:1339–1346. doi: 10.1001/jama.280.15.1339. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Hammond P, Harris AL, Das SK, et al. Safety and decision support in oncology. Meth Information Med. 1994;33:371–381. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Sless D. What is information design? In: Penman R, Sless D, editors. Designing Information for People. Sydney, Australia: Communications Research; 1994. pp. 1–16. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Wyatt JC, Wright P. Design should help use of patients’ data. Lancet. 1998;352:1375–1378. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(97)08306-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Nygren E, Wyatt JC, Wright P. Helping clinicians to find data and avoid delays. Lancet. 1998;352:1462–1466. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(97)08307-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Weed LL. Medical records that guide and teach. N Engl J Med. 1968;278:593–599. doi: 10.1056/NEJM196803142781105. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Fries JF. Alternatives in medical record formats. Med Care. 1974;12:871–881. doi: 10.1097/00005650-197410000-00006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Wright P. Research in brief: Understanding tabular displays. Vis Language. 1973;7:351–359. [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Tufte ER. Visual Explanations. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press; 1997. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Powsner SM, Tufte ER. Graphical summary of patient status. Lancet. 1994;344:386–389. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(94)91406-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Staggers N, Mills ME. Nurse-computer interaction: Staff performance outcomes. Nursing Res. 1994;43:144–150. doi: 10.1097/00006199-199405000-00004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Wright P, Jansen C, Wyatt JC. How to limit clinical errors in interpretation of data. Lancet. 1998;1352:1539–1543. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(98)08308-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Poulton EC. Letter differentiation and rate of comprehension in reading. J Appl Psychol. 1965;49:358–362. doi: 10.1037/h0022461. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Maylor EA. Older peoples’ memory for the past and future. Psychologist. 1996;9:456–459. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Bransford JD, Johnson MK. Contextual prerequisites for understanding: Some investigations of comprehension and recall. J Verbal Learning Verbal Behav. 1972;11:717–726. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80006-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Powsner SM, Wyatt JC, Wright P. Opportunities for challenges of computerization. Lancet. 1998;352:1617–1622. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(98)08309-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Wyatt JC. Clinical data systems, part 2: Components and techniques. Lancet. 1994;344:609–614. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(94)90409-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Wyatt JC. Clinical data systems, part 3: Developing and evaluating clinical data systems. Lancet. 1994;344:1682–1688. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(94)90463-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Sullivan F, Mitchell E. Has general practitioner computing made a difference to patient care? A systematic review of published reports. Br Med J. 1995;311:848–852. doi: 10.1136/bmj.311.7009.848. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Massaro TA. Introducing physician order entry at a major academic medical center: II, Impact on organizational culture and behavior. Acad Med. 1993;68:20–25. doi: 10.1097/00001888-199301000-00003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Digital Imaging are provided here courtesy of Springer

RESOURCES