Bringing HELP to the clinical laboratory--use of an expert system to provide automatic interpretation of laboratory...

In domains where the types of data which are to be interpreted are relatively constrained (as in the case of specific laboratory test results), our modular data-driven approach can be very productive and well received by the clinical recipient of the data. The computer rarely surpasses the knowledge of an experts result from lack of communication, imperfect memory, oversight or multiple decision-makers caring for the same patient. In such cases, most of the alerts are immediately recognized as valid, so the need for elaborate explanations is not a high priority. On the other hand, a non-specialist is alerted to the need for additional investigation, tests or collaborative support, by the fact that a reminder or diagnosis that s/he had not previously considered, appears. In other words, for the expert, a data-driven system provides unceasing oversight in high-volume low-yielded situations where a small number of mistakes may uncommonly occur for reasons which are not related to the lack of knowledge of the provider. For the non-specialist the system suggests that the patient may have problems in a domain for which the physician needs additional support. In the present state of the art, we do not think that total reliance on the computer-contained knowledge is the ultimate source of this additional support; providing the awareness of the need may be the most important contribution. Once you know that you need help, it is usually obtainable. In a discussion about how computer systems have failed, Friedman and Gustafson made the following observation.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)