Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Clinical evidence framework for Bayesian networks

  • Regular Paper
  • Published:
Knowledge and Information Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There is poor uptake of prognostic decision support models by clinicians regardless of their accuracy. There is evidence that this results from doubts about the basis of the model as the evidence behind clinical models is often not clear to anyone other than their developers. In this paper, we propose a framework for representing the evidence-base of a Bayesian network (BN) decision support model. The aim of this evidence framework is to be able to present all the clinical evidence alongside the BN itself. The evidence framework is capable of presenting supporting and conflicting evidence, and evidence associated with relevant but excluded factors. It also allows the completeness of the evidence to be queried. We illustrate this framework using a BN that has been previously developed to predict acute traumatic coagulopathy, a potentially fatal disorder of blood clotting, at early stages of trauma care.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. A preliminary stage of the evidence framework has been briefly described in [49].

References

  1. Allemang D, Hendler J (2011) Semantic web for the working ontologist: effective modeling in RDFS and OWL. Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos

    Google Scholar 

  2. Altman DG, Vergouwe Y, Royston P, Moons KG (2009) Prognosis and prognostic research: validating a prognostic model. BMJ 338:1432–1435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Antal P, Fannes G, Timmerman D, Moreau Y, De Moor B (2004) Using literature and data to learn Bayesian networks as clinical models of ovarian tumors. Artif Intell Med 30:257–281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Antal P, Mészáros T, De Moor B, Dobrowiecki T (2001) Annotated Bayesian networks: a tool to integrate textual and probabilistic medical knowledge. In: Proceedings of 14th IEEE symposium on computer-based medical systems, 2001. CBMS 2001, pp 177–182

  5. Arias M, Diez FJ, Palacios-Alonso M, Bermejo I (2012) ProbModelXML: a format for encoding probabilistic graphical models. In: Proceedings of the sixth European workshop on probabilistic graphical models, Granada, Spain, pp 11–18

  6. ATCBN (2015) Acute traumatic coagulopathy Bayesian network evidence browser [Online]. http://www.traumamodels.com/atcbn/ATC_EBase. Accessed 15 Jan 2016

  7. Berners-Lee T, Hendler J, Lassila O (2001) The semantic web. Sci Am 284:28–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bodenreider O (2004) The unified medical language system (UMLS): integrating biomedical terminology. Nucl Acids Res 32:D267–D270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bucci G, Sandrucci V, Vicario E (2011) Ontologies and Bayesian networks in medical diagnosis. In: 2011 44th Hawaii international conference on system sciences (HICSS), Hawaii, USA, pp 1–8

  10. Cozman FG (1998) The interchange format for Bayesian networks [Online]. http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~fgcozman/Research/InterchangeFormat/x. Accessed 15 Jan 2016

  11. Da Costa PCG, Laskey KB, Laskey KJ (2008) PR-OWL: a Bayesian ontology language for the semantic web. In: Uncertainty reasoning for the semantic web I. Springer, pp 88–107

  12. Daly R, Shen Q, Aitken S (2011) Learning Bayesian networks: approaches and issues. Knowl Eng Rev 26(02):99–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Devitt A, Danev B, Matusikova K (2006) Ontology-driven automatic construction of Bayesian networks for telecommunication network management. In: 2nd international workshop: formal ontologies meet industry (FOMI 2006), Trento, Italy

  14. Ding Z, Peng Y (2004) A probabilistic extension to ontology language OWL. In: Proceedings of the 37th annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences, 2004, Hawaii, USA, pp 1–10

  15. Fenton NE, Neil M, Caballero JG (2007) Using ranked nodes to model qualitative judgments in Bayesian networks. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 19:1420–1432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Fenton NE, Neil MD (2012) Risk assessment and decision analysis with Bayesian networks. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Fenz S (2012) An ontology-based approach for constructing Bayesian networks. Data Knowl Eng 73:73–88. doi:10.1016/j.datak.2011.12.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Guazzelli A, Zeller M, Lin W-C, Williams G (2009) PMML: an open standard for sharing models. R J 1(1):60–65

    Google Scholar 

  19. Harbour R, Miller J (2001) A new system for grading recommendations in evidence based guidelines. BMJ 323:334–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Helsper EM, van der Gaag LC (2002) Building Bayesian networks through ontologies. In: ECAI proceedings of 15th, Lyon, France, pp 680–684

  21. Helsper EM, van Der Gaag LC (2007) Ontologies for probabilistic networks: a case study in the oesophageal-cancer domain. Knowl Eng Rev 22:67–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Ishak MB, Leray P, Amor NB (2011) Ontology-based generation of object oriented Bayesian networks. In: Proceedings of the 8th Bayesian modelling applications workshop, pp 9–17

  23. Jaspers MW, Smeulers M, Vermeulen H, Peute LW (2011) Effects of clinical decision-support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes: a synthesis of high-quality systematic review findings. J Am Med Inform Assoc 18:327–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Kawamoto K, Houlihan CA, Balas EA, Lobach DF (2005) Improving clinical practice using clinical decision support systems: a systematic review of trials to identify features critical to success. BMJ 330:765

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Knublauch H, Fergerson R, Noy N, Musen M (2004) The Protégé OWL plugin: an open development environment for semantic web applications. In: Semantic web—ISWC 2004, Hiroshima, Japan, pp 229–243

  26. Koller D, Pfeffer A (1997) Object-oriented Bayesian networks. In: Proceedings of the thirteenth conference on uncertainty in artificial intelligence. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., Providence, RI, pp 302–313

  27. Kuo C-L, Buchman D, Katiyar A, Poole D (2013) Probabilistic reasoning with undefined properties in ontologically-based belief networks. In: Proceedings of the twenty-third international joint conference on artificial intelligence. AAAI Press, Beijing, China, pp 2532–2539

  28. Laskey KB, Costa PC (2005) Of klingons and starships: Bayesian logic for the 23rd century. In: Proceedings of the twenty-first conference on uncertainty in artificial intelligence, Edinburgh, UK, pp 346–353

  29. Laskey KB, Mahoney S (1997) Network fragments: representing knowledge for constructing probabilistic models. In: Proceedings of the thirteenth annual conference on uncertainty in artificial intelligence (UAI-97). Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Providence, RI, pp 334–341

  30. Li J, Wang ZJ (2009) Controlling the false discovery rate of the association/causality structure learned with the PC algorithm. J Mach Learn Res 10:475–514

    Google Scholar 

  31. Lucas PJ, van der Gaag LC, Abu-Hanna A (2004) Bayesian networks in biomedicine and health-care. Artif Intell Med 30:201–214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Moons KGM, Altman DG, Vergouwe Y, Royston P (2009a) Prognosis and prognostic research: application and impact of prognostic models in clinical practice. BMJ 338:1487–1490

    Google Scholar 

  33. Moons KGM, Royston P, Vergouwe Y, Grobbee DE, Altman DG (2009b) Prognosis and prognostic research: What, why, and how? BMJ 338:1317–1320. doi:10.1136/bmj.b375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Neil M, Fenton NE, Nielsen L (2000) Building large-scale Bayesian networks. Knowl Eng Rev 15:257–284

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. Pearl J (2000) Causality: models, reasoning and inference. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Richardson M, Domingos P (2006) Markov logic networks. Mach Learn 62:107–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Richardson T, Spirtes P (2002) Ancestral graph Markov models. Ann Stat 30(4):962–1030

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  38. Rieger C, Grinberg M (1977) The declarative representation and procedural simulation of causality in physical mechanisms. In: Proceedings of the 5th international joint conference on artificial intelligence, vol 1, pp 250–256

  39. Sadeghi S, Barzi A, Smith JW (2005) Ontology driven construction of a knowledgebase for Bayesian decision models based on UMLS. Stud Health Technol Inform 116:223–228

    Google Scholar 

  40. Segaran T, Evans C, Taylor J (2009) Programming the semantic web. O’Reilly Media, Sebastopol, CA

    Google Scholar 

  41. Spirtes P, Glymour CN, Scheines R (2000) Causation, prediction, and search. MIT press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  42. Tsamardinos I, Brown LE (2008) Bounding the false discovery rate in local Bayesian network learning. In: AAAI, pp 1100–1105

  43. Van der Gaag LC, Tabachneck-Schijf HJM (2010) Library-style ontologies to support varying model views. Int J Approx Reason 51:196–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) (2004) Web Ontology Language (OWL), W3C Recommendation [Online]. http://www.w3.org/TR/owlref/. Accessed 18 Mar 2016

  45. Wyatt JC, Altman DG (1995) Commentary: Prognostic models: Clinically useful or quickly forgotten? BMJ 311:1539–1541. doi:10.1136/bmj.311.7019.1539

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Yang Y, Calmet J (2005) OntoBayes: an ontology-driven uncertainty model. In: International conference on computational intelligence for modelling, control and automation, 2005 and international conference on intelligent agents, web technologies and internet commerce, Vienna, Austria, pp 457–463. doi:10.1109/CIMCA.2005.1631307

  47. Yet B, Marsh W (2015) BNEvidenceBase: evidence framework for BN models [Online]. https://github.com/byet/BNEvidenceBase/. Accessed 15 Jan 2016

  48. Yet B, Perkins Z, Fenton N, Tai N, Marsh W (2014a) Not just data: a method for improving prediction with knowledge. J Biomed Inform 48:28–37. doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2013.10.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Yet B, Perkins Z, Tai N, Marsh W (2014b) Explicit evidence for prognostic Bayesian network models. Stud Health Technol Inform 205:53–57. doi:10.3233/978-1-61499-432-9-53

    Google Scholar 

  50. Zheng H-T, Kang B-Y, Kim H-G (2008) An ontology-based Bayesian network approach for representing uncertainty in clinical practice guidelines. In: Uncertainty reasoning for the semantic web I: ISWC international workshops, URSW 2005–2007, revised selected and invited papers. Springer, pp 161–173

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research has been partly funded by the Academic Department of Military Surgery and Trauma, UK Defence Medical Services, and a Principal’s Studentship, Queen Mary University of London.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Electronic Engineering and Computer Science, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK

    Barbaros Yet & D. William R. Marsh

  2. Centre for Trauma Science, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK

    Zane B. Perkins

  3. The Royal London Hospital, London, UK

    Nigel R. M. Tai

  4. Department of Industrial Engineering, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey

    Barbaros Yet

Authors
  1. Barbaros Yet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zane B. Perkins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nigel R. M. Tai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. D. William R. Marsh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Barbaros Yet.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yet, B., Perkins, Z.B., Tai, N.R.M. et al. Clinical evidence framework for Bayesian networks. Knowl Inf Syst 50, 117–143 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-016-0932-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-016-0932-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation