Elkin Peter L, Brown Steven H, Carter John, Bauer Brent A, Wahner-Roedler Dietlind, Bergstrom Larry, Pittelkow Mark, Rosse Cornelius
Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research, 200 First St. S.W., Rochester, MN 55905, USA.
Int J Med Inform. 2002 Dec 18;68(1-3):175-86. doi: 10.1016/s1386-5056(02)00075-8.
Developers and purchasers of controlled health terminologies require valid mechanisms for comparing terminological systems. By Controlled Health Vocabularies, we refer to terminologies and terminological systems designed to represent clinical data at a granularity consistent with the practice of today's healthcare delivery. Comprehensive criterion for the evaluation of such systems historically have been lacking and the known criteria are inconsistently applied. Although there are many papers which describe specific desirable features of a controlled health vocabulary, to date there is not a consistent guide for evaluators of terminologies to reference, which will help them compare implementations of terminological systems on an equal footing [Methods Inf. Med. 37 (1998) 394, J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 5 (1998) 503]. This guideline serves to fill the gap between academic enumeration of desirable terminological characteristics and the practical implementation or rigorous evaluations which will yield comparable data regarding the quality of one or more controlled health vocabularies.
受控健康术语的开发者和购买者需要有效的机制来比较术语系统。我们所说的受控健康词汇表,是指旨在以与当今医疗服务实践相一致的粒度来表示临床数据的术语和术语系统。历史上一直缺乏用于评估此类系统的综合标准,而且已知标准的应用也不一致。尽管有许多论文描述了受控健康词汇表的特定理想特征,但迄今为止,还没有一个供术语评估者参考的统一指南,以帮助他们在平等的基础上比较术语系统的实施情况[《医学方法信息》37 (1998) 394,《美国医学信息学会杂志》5 (1998) 503]。本指南旨在填补理想术语特征的学术列举与实际实施或严格评估之间的空白,这些评估将产生关于一个或多个受控健康词汇表质量的可比数据。