skip to main content
10.1145/3077584.3077586acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicisdmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

DS-Ontology: A Disease-Symptom Ontology for General Diagnosis Enhancement

Published:01 April 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

The diagnosis process is often challenging, it involves the correlation of various pieces of information followed by several possible conclusions and iterations of diseases that may overload physicians when facing urgent cases that may lead to bad consequences threatening people's lives. The physician is asked to search for all symptoms related to a specific disease. To make this kind of search possible, there is a strong need for an effective way to store and retrieve medical knowledge from various datasets in order to find links between human disease and symptoms. For this purpose, we propose in this work a new Disease-Symptom Ontology (DS-Ontology). Utilizing existing biomedical ontologies, we integrate all available disease-symptom relationships to create a DS-Ontology that will be used latter in an ontology-based Clinical Decision Support System to determine a highly effective medical diagnosis.

References

  1. Kaushal Giri. Role of ontology in semantic web. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 31(2), 2011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Daniel L Rubin, Nigam H Shah, and Natalya F Noy. Biomedical ontologies: a functional perspective. Briefings in bioinformatics, 9(1):75--90, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Christopher Ochs, Zhe He, Ling Zheng, James Geller, Yehoshua Perl, George Hripcsak, and Mark A Musen. Utilizing a structural meta-ontology for family-based quality assurance of the bioportal ontologies. Journal of biomedical informatics, 61:63--76, 2016. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Jean Charlet, Gunnar Declerck, Ferdinand Dhombres, Pierre Gayet, Patrick Miroux, and Pierre-Yves Vandenbussche. Construire une ontologie médicale pour la recherche d'information: problématiques terminologiques et de modélisation. In 23es journées francophones d'Ingénierie des connaissances, pages 33--48, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. René Amalberti, Yves Auroy, Don Berwick, and Paul Barach. Five system barriers to achieving ultrasafe health care. Annals of internal medicine, 142(9):756--764, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Fouad Zablith, Grigoris Antoniou, Mathieu d'Aquin, Giorgos Flouris, Haridimos Kondylakis, Enrico Motta, Dimitris Plexousakis, and Marta Sabou. Ontology evolution: a process-centric survey. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 30(01):45--75, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Leo Obrst, Michael Gruninger, Ken Baclawski, Mike Bennett, Dan Brickley, Gary Berg-Cross, Pascal Hitzler, Krzysztof Janowicz, Christine Kapp, Oliver Kutz, et al. Semantic web and big data meets applied ontology. Applied Ontology, 9(2):155--170, 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Harry Chen, Tim Finin, and Anupam Joshi. Using owl in a pervasive computing broker. Technical report, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Mijal Mistry, Dipti Shah, Pranav Pathak, and Abu Sarwar Zamani. Ontologies: Need, usage and attainment of health care system. In Intelligent Systems and Signal Processing (ISSP), 2013 International Conference on, pages 381--386, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Werner Ceusters, Barry Smith, and Jim Flanagan. Ontology and medical terminology: Why description logics are not enough. Towards an Electronic Patient Record (TEPR 2003), Boston, MA, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Alan L Rector et al. Clinical terminology: why is it so hard? Methods of information in medicine, 38(4/5):239--252, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Olivier Bodenreider. The unified medical language system (umls): integrating biomedical terminology. Nucleic acids research, 32(suppl 1):D267--D270, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Dennis Lee, Nicolette de Keizer, Francis Lau, and Ronald Cornet. Literature review of snomed ct use. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 21(e1):e11--e19, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Richard H Scheuermann, Werner Ceusters, and Barry Smith. Toward an ontological treatment of disease and diagnosis. Proceedings of the 2009 AMIA summit on translational bioinformatics, 2009:116--120, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Warren A Kibbe, Cesar Arze, Victor Felix, Elvira Mitraka, Evan Bolton, Gang Fu, Christopher J Mungall, Janos X Binder, James Malone, Drashtti Vasant, et al. Disease ontology 2015 update: an expanded and updated database of human diseases for linking biomedical knowledge through disease data. Nucleic acids research, page gku1011, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Osama Mohammed, Rachid Benlamri, and Simon Fong. Building a diseases symptoms ontology for medical diagnosis: an integrative approach. In Future Generation Communication Technology (FGCT), 2012 International Conference on, pages 104--108. IEEE, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Heiner Oberkampf, Sonja Zillner, Bernhard Bauer, and Matthias Hammon. Interpreting patient data using medical background knowledge. ICBO, 897:3, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Heiner Oberkampf, Sonja Zillner, Bernhard Bauer, and Matthias Hammon. An ogms-based model for clinical information (mci). In ICBO, pages 97--100, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Heiner Oberkampf, Turan Gojayev, Sonja Zillner, Dietlind Zühlke, Sören Auer, and Matthias Hammon. From symptoms to diseases--creating the missing link. In European Semantic Web Conference, pages 652--667. Springer, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Barry Smith, Michael Ashburner, Cornelius Rosse, Jonathan Bard, William Bug, Werner Ceusters, Louis J Goldberg, Karen Eilbeck, Amelia Ireland, Christopher J Mungall, et al. The obo foundry: coordinated evolution of ontologies to support biomedical data integration. Nature biotechnology, 25(11):1251--1255, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. John H Gennari, Mark A Musen, Ray W Fergerson, William E Grosso, Monica Crubézy, Henrik Eriksson, Natalya F Noy, and Samson W Tu. The evolution of protégé: an environment for knowledge-based systems development. International Journal of Human-computer studies, 58(1):89--123, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. DS-Ontology: A Disease-Symptom Ontology for General Diagnosis Enhancement

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Other conferences
            ICISDM '17: Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Information System and Data Mining
            April 2017
            163 pages
            ISBN:9781450348331
            DOI:10.1145/3077584

            Copyright © 2017 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 1 April 2017

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article
            • Research
            • Refereed limited

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader