» Articles » PMID: 30658684

Development of a Cardiac-centered Frailty Ontology

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Date 2019 Jan 20
PMID 30658684
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: A Cardiac-centered Frailty Ontology can be an important foundation for using NLP to assess patient frailty. Frailty is an important consideration when making patient treatment decisions, particularly in older adults, those with a cardiac diagnosis, or when major surgery is a consideration. Clinicians often report patient's frailty in progress notes and other documentation. Frailty is recorded in many different ways in patient records and many different validated frailty-measuring instruments are available, with little consistency across instruments. We specifically explored concepts relevant to decisions regarding cardiac interventions. We based our work on text found in a large corpus of clinical notes from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) national Electronic Health Record (EHR) database.

Results: The full ontology has 156 concepts, with 246 terms. It includes 86 concepts we expect to find in clinical documents, with 12 qualifier values. The remaining 58 concepts represent hierarchical groups (e.g., physical function findings). Our top-level class is clinical finding, which has children clinical history finding, instrument finding, and physical examination finding, reflecting the OGMS definition of clinical finding. Instrument finding is any score found for the existing frailty instruments. Within our ontology, we used SNOMED-CT concepts where possible. Some of the 86 concepts we expect to find in clinical documents are associated with the properties like ability interpretation. The concept ability to walk can either be able, assisted or unable. Each concept-property level pairing gets a different frailty score. Each scored concept received three scores: a frailty score, a relevance to cardiac decisions score, and a likelihood of resolving after the recommended intervention score. The ontology includes the relationship between scores from ten frailty instruments and frailty as assessed using ontology concepts. It also included rules for mapping ontology elements to instrument items for three common frailty assessment instruments. Ontology elements are used in two clinical NLP systems.

Conclusions: We developed and validated a Cardiac-centered Frailty Ontology, which is a machine-interoperable description of frailty that reflects all the areas that clinicians consider when deciding which cardiac intervention will best serve the patient as well as frailty indications generally relevant to medical decisions. The ontology owl file is available on Bioportal at http://bioportal.bioontology.org/ontologies/CCFO .

Citing Articles

Natural language processing systems for extracting information from electronic health records about activities of daily living. A systematic review.

Wieland-Jorna Y, van Kooten D, Verheij R, de Man Y, Francke A, Oosterveld-Vlug M JAMIA Open. 2024; 7(2):ooae044.

PMID: 38798774 PMC: 11126158. DOI: 10.1093/jamiaopen/ooae044.


Feasibility of Extracting Meaningful Patient Centered Outcomes From the Electronic Health Record Following Critical Illness in the Elderly.

Ahmad S, Tarabochia A, Budahn L, LeMahieu A, Anderson B, Vashistha K Front Med (Lausanne). 2022; 9:826169.

PMID: 35733861 PMC: 9207323. DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2022.826169.


Development and validation of a prediction model for actionable aspects of frailty in the text of clinicians' encounter notes.

Martin J, Crane-Droesch A, Lapite F, Puhl J, Kmiec T, Silvestri J J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2021; 29(1):109-119.

PMID: 34791302 PMC: 8714261. DOI: 10.1093/jamia/ocab248.


Automated Coding of Under-Studied Medical Concept Domains: Linking Physical Activity Reports to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health.

Newman-Griffis D, Fosler-Lussier E Front Digit Health. 2021; 3.

PMID: 33791684 PMC: 8009547. DOI: 10.3389/fdgth.2021.620828.


Design and Use of Semantic Resources: Findings from the Section on Knowledge Representation and Management of the 2020 International Medical Informatics Association Yearbook.

Dhombres F, Charlet J Yearb Med Inform. 2020; 29(1):163-168.

PMID: 32823311 PMC: 7442529. DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1702010.

References
1.
Shao Y, Mohanty A, Ahmed A, Weir C, Bray B, Shah R . Identification and Use of Frailty Indicators from Text to Examine Associations with Clinical Outcomes Among Patients with Heart Failure. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2017; 2016:1110-1118. PMC: 5333331. View

2.
Clegg A, Young J, Iliffe S, Rikkert M, Rockwood K . Frailty in elderly people. Lancet. 2013; 381(9868):752-62. PMC: 4098658. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)62167-9. View

3.
MAHONEY F, BARTHEL D . FUNCTIONAL EVALUATION: THE BARTHEL INDEX. Md State Med J. 1965; 14:61-5. View

4.
Fries J, Spitz P, Kraines R, HOLMAN H . Measurement of patient outcome in arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 1980; 23(2):137-45. DOI: 10.1002/art.1780230202. View

5.
Lawton M, Brody E . Assessment of older people: self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. Gerontologist. 1969; 9(3):179-86. View