Diagnosis, misdiagnosis, lucky guess, hearsay, and more: an ontological analysis

Abstract

BackgroundDisease and diagnosis have been the subject of much ontological inquiry. However, the insights gained therein have not yet been well enough applied to the study, management, and improvement of data quality in electronic health records (EHR) and administrative systems. Data in these systems suffer from workarounds clinicians are forced to apply due to limitations in the current state-of-the art in system design which ignore the various types of entities that diagnoses as information content entities can be and are about. This leads to difficulties in distinguishing amongst diagnostic assertions misdiagnosis from correct diagnosis, and the former from coincidentally correct statements about disease.MethodsWe applied recent advances in the ontological understanding of the aboutness relation to the problem of diagnosis and disease as defined by the Ontology for General Medical Science. We created six scenarios that we analyzed using the method of Referent Tracking to identify all the entities and their relationships which must be present for each scenario to hold true. We discovered deficiencies in existing ontological definitions and proposed revisions of them to account for the improved understanding that resulted from our analysis.ResultsOur key result is that a diagnosis is an information content entity (ICE) whose concretization(s) are typically about a configuration in which there exists a disease that inheres in an organism and instantiates a certain type (e.g., hypertension). Misdiagnoses are ICEs whose concretizations succeed in aboutness on the level of reference for individual entities and types (the organism and the disease), but fail in aboutness on the level of compound expression (i.e., there is no configuration that corresponds in total with what is asserted). Provenance of diagnoses as concretizations is critical to distinguishing them from lucky guesses, hearsay, and justified layperson belief.ConclusionsRecent improvements in our understanding of aboutness significantly improved our understanding of the ontology of diagnosis and related information content entities, which in turn opens new perspectives for the implementation of data capture methods in EHR and other systems to allow diagnostic assertions to be captured with less ambiguity.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13326-016-0098-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Towards Formal Computable Representation of Clinical Trial Eligibility Criteria for Alzheimer's Disease

“…The representation of diagnosis is based on Hogan et al . work (Hogan & Ceusters, 2016). Further, a diagnosis of a certain disease does not necessarily mean the patient has that disease, but can be an artifact of the diagnostic process.…”

Ontology and Cognitive Outcomes

“…For example, Figure 3 illustrates the formation of an RTB that may or may not be veridical but which the user holds with high confidence, although the Cognitive Process that outputted the RTB is not a PPCF. Here it is assumed that the relevant type of Cognitive Process requires veridical input data to be reliable; as such, even though the analyst may represent her RTB as fused with a high confidence value, the system knows to explicitly represent the information as unwarranted -as a mere guess (compare with [40]). The upshot is that warrant, veridicality, and confidence can each provide a dimension of data integrity to use when assessing information for the sake of decision making and outcomes-based research.…”

A realism-based approach to an ontological representation of symbiotic interactions

“…Referent tracking is a method for explicitly representing particulars in reality and the relationships that exist between them and the types that they instantiate [8]. Note that in the past, we and others have found referent-tracking based analysis to also provide a rigorous test of ontological definitions [9][10][11], so our referent-tracking analysis also provides quality assurance of key definitions. We intend our work here to serve as a foundation for future data collection on interspecies interactions both within and outside of biomedicine.…”