These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

146 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9760394)

  • 1. Representing clinical guidelines in GLIF: individual and collaborative expertise.
    Patel VL; Allen VG; Arocha JF; Shortliffe EH
    J Am Med Inform Assoc; 1998; 5(5):467-83. PubMed ID: 9760394
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The guideline interchange format: a model for representing guidelines.
    Ohno-Machado L; Gennari JH; Murphy SN; Jain NL; Tu SW; Oliver DE; Pattison-Gordon E; Greenes RA; Shortliffe EH; Barnett GO
    J Am Med Inform Assoc; 1998; 5(4):357-72. PubMed ID: 9670133
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Analysis of the process of encoding guidelines: a comparison of GLIF2 and GLIF3.
    Patel VL; Branch T; Wang D; Peleg M; Boxwala A
    Methods Inf Med; 2002; 41(2):105-13. PubMed ID: 12061116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Sharable computer-based clinical practice guidelines: rationale, obstacles, approaches, and prospects.
    Greenes RA; Peleg M; Boxwala A; Tu S; Patel V; Shortliffe EH
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2001; 84(Pt 1):201-5. PubMed ID: 11604733
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The InterMed approach to sharable computer-interpretable guidelines: a review.
    Peleg M; Boxwala AA; Tu S; Zeng Q; Ogunyemi O; Wang D; Patel VL; Greenes RA; Shortliffe EH
    J Am Med Inform Assoc; 2004; 11(1):1-10. PubMed ID: 14527977
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. GLIF3: the evolution of a guideline representation format.
    Peleg M; Boxwala AA; Ogunyemi O; Zeng Q; Tu S; Lacson R; Bernstam E; Ash N; Mork P; Ohno-Machado L; Shortliffe EH; Greenes RA
    Proc AMIA Symp; 2000; ():645-9. PubMed ID: 11079963
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Approaches for guideline versioning using GLIF.
    Peleg M; Kantor R
    AMIA Annu Symp Proc; 2003; 2003():509-13. PubMed ID: 14728225
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A framework and tools for authoring, editing, documenting, sharing, searching, navigating, and executing computer-based clinical guidelines.
    Greenes RA; Boxwala A; Sloan WN; Ohno-Machado L; Deibel SR
    Proc AMIA Symp; 1999; ():261-5. PubMed ID: 10566361
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Architecture for a multipurpose guideline execution engine.
    Boxwala AA; Greenes RA; Deibel SR
    Proc AMIA Symp; 1999; ():701-5. PubMed ID: 10566450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Sharable representation of clinical guidelines in GLIF: relationship to the Arden Syntax.
    Peleg M; Boxwala AA; Bernstam E; Tu S; Greenes RA; Shortliffe EH
    J Biomed Inform; 2001 Jun; 34(3):170-81. PubMed ID: 11723699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Encoding a depression screening guideline using GLIF.
    Choi J; Sapp J; Bakken S
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2006; 122():905-6. PubMed ID: 17102456
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Translating Arden MlMs into GLIF guidelines--a case study of hyperkalemia patient screening.
    Wang D
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2004; 101():177-81. PubMed ID: 15537224
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparison of primary care expert and computer-interpretable depression screening guideline recommendations.
    Choi J; Bakken S
    AMIA Annu Symp Proc; 2006; 2006():887. PubMed ID: 17238506
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Approaches for creating computer-interpretable guidelines that facilitate decision support.
    de Clercq PA; Blom JA; Korsten HH; Hasman A
    Artif Intell Med; 2004 May; 31(1):1-27. PubMed ID: 15182844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A methodology for modular representation of guidelines.
    Scott-Wright AO; Fischer RP; Denekamp Y; Boxwala AA
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2004; 107(Pt 1):149-53. PubMed ID: 15360793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Ability of expert physicians to structure clinical guidelines: reality versus perception.
    Shalom E; Shahar Y; Taieb-Maimon M; Martins SB; Vaszar LT; Goldstein MK; Gutnik L; Lunenfeld E
    J Eval Clin Pract; 2009 Dec; 15(6):1043-53. PubMed ID: 20367704
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Automatic checking of the correctness of clinical guidelines in GLARE.
    Terenziani P; Anselma L; Bottrighi A; Giordano L; Montani S
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2007; 129(Pt 1):807-11. PubMed ID: 17911828
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Obstacles to Implementing an Execution Engine for Clinical Guidelines Formalized in GLIF.
    Kolesa P; Spidlen J; Zvárová J
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2005; 116():563-8. PubMed ID: 16160317
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Handling expressiveness and comprehensibility requirements in GLIF3.
    Peleg M; Boxwala AA; Tu S; Greenes RA; Shortliffe EH; Patel VL
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2001; 84(Pt 1):241-5. PubMed ID: 11604741
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Encoding a clinical practice guideline using guideline interchange format: a case study of a depression screening and management guideline.
    Choi J; Currie LM; Wang D; Bakken S
    Int J Med Inform; 2007 Oct; 76 Suppl 2():S302-7. PubMed ID: 17600762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.