Yes, with the understanding that I do want to be productive.
I have been working with Medical Informatics for over 25
years, and have extensive experience in the practice and
delivery of computer systems that support healthcare.
I am willing to share my knowledge in the general field, and
specifically in the VistA software that I am using as a
basis for the ontology modeling.
I am promoting this effort to build a community which would
be knowledgeable about health ontology, as well as building
an artifact that incorporates a lot of the knowledge within
VistA, and about VistA. I think this will seriously advance
the state of the art, as there is nothing like a working system
to specify and disambiguate issues of meaning.
I welcome involvement by novices and professionals alike.
This should prove to be educational to all of us, for different
reasons, with the understanding that the initial flurry of effort
may be a bit chaotic, however, it should be great fun as well.
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
FAQ: What ontology technology are you considering using for this effort?
I am planning on using a minimum of three separate
technologies, as I am hoping to "triangulate" on the
meaning of the VistA system's implicit meaning for
Files and fields currently stored therein. My current
expectation is that I will be using SUMO, OWL, and
CycL. Each of these technologies has different strengths,
and I hope to learn more about the details about them
with this project. Each set of predicates make different
distinctions, and I hope to find a combination that will
reflect the actual differentiations which the software makes.
As many of you know, I have been interested, and involved
with Cyc for many years, having written the Unofficial FAQ
for Cyc more years in the past than I want to admit in public.
Likewise, I have been a fan of Adam Pease's work on SUMO
since its inception, and have been favorably impressed by
his dedication, and the professionalism of his team, as well
as their generous spirit with the rest of the community.
I have included OWL, primarily on the strength of Protege,
and the work done by Stanford on medical ontologies.
My hope is that this will increase the likelihood that
the result will increase interoperability.
A careful argument that shows strong benefits for the project
might sway me from this plan, but my current thoughts
show that this strategy has the highest degree of utility
for the project and for the community.
technologies, as I am hoping to "triangulate" on the
meaning of the VistA system's implicit meaning for
Files and fields currently stored therein. My current
expectation is that I will be using SUMO, OWL, and
CycL. Each of these technologies has different strengths,
and I hope to learn more about the details about them
with this project. Each set of predicates make different
distinctions, and I hope to find a combination that will
reflect the actual differentiations which the software makes.
As many of you know, I have been interested, and involved
with Cyc for many years, having written the Unofficial FAQ
for Cyc more years in the past than I want to admit in public.
Likewise, I have been a fan of Adam Pease's work on SUMO
since its inception, and have been favorably impressed by
his dedication, and the professionalism of his team, as well
as their generous spirit with the rest of the community.
I have included OWL, primarily on the strength of Protege,
and the work done by Stanford on medical ontologies.
My hope is that this will increase the likelihood that
the result will increase interoperability.
A careful argument that shows strong benefits for the project
might sway me from this plan, but my current thoughts
show that this strategy has the highest degree of utility
for the project and for the community.
FAQ: What are the plans you have for licensing the content of this ontology?
The VistA system is already a work of the government,
which means that it is public domain. While strictly speaking,
an ontology based on the information and knowledge
implicit in the VistA system can be licensed in many
ways, I would like to use a license that supports the upkeep
of the ontology on a long term basis, and which furthers
my goals to make sure that information stored in a VistA
implementation can be shared easily with other systems.
I don't know enough regarding ontology licensing to know
if a software program license is appropriate, or if a license
used for a shared written work is correct. I am willing to
adopt a license that best supports my goals.
which means that it is public domain. While strictly speaking,
an ontology based on the information and knowledge
implicit in the VistA system can be licensed in many
ways, I would like to use a license that supports the upkeep
of the ontology on a long term basis, and which furthers
my goals to make sure that information stored in a VistA
implementation can be shared easily with other systems.
I don't know enough regarding ontology licensing to know
if a software program license is appropriate, or if a license
used for a shared written work is correct. I am willing to
adopt a license that best supports my goals.
FAQ: What are your reasons for creating this ontology?
I expect that as time passes, more systems are going
to need to be defined by the strict level of details that
are needed when defining a formal ontology of its inner
workings. Especially with computer systems for health
related fields, these definitions are helpful because they
address issues which can enhance the safety and
interoperability of a system. In my opinion, VistA is a
national treasure, in that has been proven to be effective
in outcomes-based studies, in supporting the delivery
of healthcare that has a positive effect on people's lives.
to need to be defined by the strict level of details that
are needed when defining a formal ontology of its inner
workings. Especially with computer systems for health
related fields, these definitions are helpful because they
address issues which can enhance the safety and
interoperability of a system. In my opinion, VistA is a
national treasure, in that has been proven to be effective
in outcomes-based studies, in supporting the delivery
of healthcare that has a positive effect on people's lives.
First Post
This blog is intended to record my excursions into knowledge representation of an existing software system using the current ontology and semantic web tools.
My initial message regarding this project was:
My initial message regarding this project was:
I am looking for collaborators willing to be
involved in some work making the ontology
implicit in the Department of Veteran's Affairs
VistA Hospital Information System an explicit
ontology coded in an explicit ontology.
This will be a learning experience, and I expect
that the work will be documented on a website,
probably http://www.vistapedia.net
I am doing this work as a volunteer, but would
not object to collaborators who are able to find
funding through research grants or other means.
If you are interested, please call or write me,
David Whitten, whitten@worldvista.org
(713) 870-3834
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
