Talk:Clinical decision support system

From Citizendium
Revision as of 15:46, 12 November 2007 by imported>Oliver Hauss (→‎Some minor points...: new section)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Main Article
Talk Template:Default button 3
 
Template:Cell style

As seems appropriate I added engineering. Robert Tito |  Talk  22:40, 17 May 2007 (CDT)

This article focuses too much on the algorithms, and too little on the concepts. There are probably thousands of analytical platforms out there; the reader probably just needs a conceptual overview of how this technology works, and where it is being used in the clinical enterprise. Let's have sections called "supervised learning" and "unsupervised learning," "applications," "challenges."--Michael Benjamin 02:18, 21 May 2007 (CDT)

technologies

This article lists a number of technologies, but is often very vague about them (for example, it mention artificial neural networks, but doesn't specify whether they are feedforward networks or recurrent, whether backpropogation is used for training, or an unsupervised method such as Hebbian learning, and it doesn't make it clear why connectionism should be listed separately). From an engineering perspective, it just looks like a few terms for technologies, giving no indication of how or why they should be used). Greg Woodhouse 16:04, 23 May 2007 (CDT)

How to take it to the Approval stage?

I had intended this to be an introductory article on CDSS. The various decision support technologies may be discussed in the appropriate sections. If you look at the ANN entry in CZ, that is just a stub till now. Can we make it an approved article without going into details of each and every CDSS mechanics? Supten 02:00, 31 October 2007 (CDT)

Some minor points...

The introduction appears to be a bit too essay-like for me, or a bit too chatty. One important point that is missing so far, however, is issues of responsibility: What concepts for this problem exist for the individual projects, what are the liabilities for the parties involved, be it the company producing the systems or the doctors applying it? This is a general problem of such systems and thus has its place in this overview article. Who gets the blame when a wrong recommendation by the system is followed up on? --Oliver Hauss 14:46, 12 November 2007 (CST)