Medical decision support systems in obstetrics: opportunities and prospects

1. Torigoe I., Shorten A. Using a pregnancy decision support program for women choosing birth after a previous caesarean in Japan: A mixed methods study. Women Birth. 2018; 31(1): e9-e19. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wombi.2017.06.001.
2. Seitinger A., Rappelsberger A., Leitich H., Binder M., Adlassnig K.P. Executable medical guidelines with Arden Syntax-Applications in dermatology and obstetrics. Artif. Intell. Med. 2018; 92: 71-81. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.artmed.2016.08.003.
3. Lewandrowski K. Integrating decision support into a laboratory utilization management program. Clin. Lab. Med. 2019; 39(2): 245-57. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cll.2019.01.004.
4. Ramos J.G., Perondi B., Dias R.D., Miranda L.C., Cohen C., Carvalho C.R. et al. A decision-aid tool for ICU admission triage is associated with a reduction in potentially inappropriate intensive care unit admissions. J. Crit. Care. 2019; 51: 77-83. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrc.2019.02.002.
5. Faria D.K., Taniguchi L.U., Fonseca L.A.M., Ferreira-Junior M., Aguiar F.J.B., Lichtenstein A. et al. Improving serum calcium test ordering according to a decision algorithm. J. Clin. Pathol. 2019; 72(3): 232-6. https://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jclinpath-2018-205026.
6. Akbulut A., Ertugrul E., Topcu V. Fetal health status prediction based on maternal clinical history using machine learning techniques. Comput. Methods Programs Biomed. 2018; 163: 87-100. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2018.06.010.
7. Van Belle V.M., Van Calster B., Timmerman D., Bourne T., Bottomley C., Valentin L. et al. A mathematical model for interpretable clinical decision support with applications in gynecology. PLoS One. 2012; 7(3): e34312. https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0034312.
8. Halpi K.L., Paprocki E.L., McDonough R.J. Utilizing health information technology to improve the recognition and management of life-threatening adrenal crisis in the pediatric emergency department: medical alert identification in the 21st century. J. Pediatr. Endocrinol. Metab. 2019; 32(5): 513-8. https://dx.doi.org/10.1515/jpem-2018-0566.
9. Itani S., Lecron F., Fortemps P. Specifics of medical data mining for diagnosis aid: a survey. Expert Syst. Appl. 2019; 118: 300-4. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2018.09.056.
10. Hyafil L., Rivest R.L. Constructing optimal binary decision trees is NP-complete. Inf. Process. Lett. 1976; 5(1): 15-7. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0020-0190(76)90095-8.
11. Bramer M. Principles of data mining. London: Springer; 2007.
12. Deng H., Runge G., Tuv E. Bias of importance measures for multi-valued attributes and solutions. Springer; 2011: 293-300.
13. D’Souza R., Shah P.S., Sander B. Clinical decision analysis in perinatology. Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. 2018; 97(4): 491-9. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aogs.13264.
14. Miller M.K., Mollen C., Behr K., Dowd M.D., Miller E., Satterwhite C.L. et al. Development of a novel computerized clinical decision support system to improve adolescent sexual health care provision. Acad. Emerg. Med. 2019; 26(4): 420-33. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/acem.13570.
15. Gorthi A., Firtion C., Vepa J. Automated risk assessment tool for pregnancy care. In: Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. 2009: 6222-5.
16. Moreira M.W.L., Rodrigues J.J.P.C., Kumar N., Niu J., Woungang I. Performance assessment of decision tree-based predictive classifiers for risk pregnancy care. In: GLOBECOM 2017 - 2017 IEEE Global Communications Conference. 2017: ID: 30231937. https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/GLOCOM.2017.8254451.
17. Bourgani E., Stylios C.D., Manis G., Georgopoulos V.C. Timed fuzzy cognitive maps for supporting obstetricians’ decisions. In: 6th European Conference of the International Federation for Medical and Biological Engineering. 2015: 753-6.
18. Douali N., Dollon J., Jaulent M.C. Personalized prediction of gestational Diabetes using a clinical decision support system. In: 2015 IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems (FUZZ-IEEE), 2015: ID: 6494264. https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/FUZZ-IEEE.2015.7337813.
19. Hao S.R., Geng S.C., Fan L.X., Chen J.J., Zhang Q., Li L.J. Intelligent diagnosis of jaundice with dynamic uncertain causality graph model. J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. B. 2017; 18(5): 393-401. https://dx.doi.org/10.1631/jzus.B1600273.
20. Zhang Y., Zhao Z. Fetal state assessment based on cardiotocography parameters using PCA and AdaBoost. In: 2017 10th International Congress on Image and Signal Processing, BioMedical Engineering and Informatics (CISP-BMEI), 2017: ID: 3686538. https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/CISP-BMEI.2017.8302314.
21. Alberola-Rubio J., Garcia-Casado J., Prats-Boluda G., Ye-Lin Y., Desantes D., Valero J., Perales A. Prediction of labor onset type: spontaneous vs induced; role of electrohysterography? Comput. Methods Programs Biomed. 2017; 144: 127-33. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2017.03.018.
22. Ferroni P., Zanzotto F., Riondino S., Scarpato N., Guadagni F., Roselli M. Breast cancer prognosis using a machine learning approach. Cancers (Basel). 2019; 11(3): 328. https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers11030328.
23. Turki T., Wang J.T.L. Clinical intelligence: New machine learning techniques for predicting clinical drug response. Comput. Biol. Med. 2019; 107: 302-22. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2018.12.017.
24. Fonseca F., Peixoto H., Miranda F., Machado J., Abelha A. Step towards prediction of perineal tear. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2017;113: 565-70.
25. Moreira M.W.L., Rodrigues J.J.P.C., Sangaiah A.K., Al-Muhtadi J., Korotaev V. Semantic interoperability and pattern classification for a service-oriented architecture in pregnancy care. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 2018; 89: 137-47.
26. Lam J., Noor Y.A., Supriyanto E. Ontology driven knowledge base for high risk pregnancy management. In: 2015 4th International Conference on Instrumentation, Communications, Information Technology, and Biomedical Engineering (ICICI-BME). 2015: 196-201.
27. Leinweber K.A., Columbo J.A., Kang R., Trooboff S.W., Goodney P.P. A Review of decision aids for patients considering more than one type of invasive treatment. J. Surg. Res. 2019; 235: 350-66. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2018.09.017.
28. Shamoon F., Leitich H., de Bruin J.S., Rappelsberger A., Adlassnig K.P. Clinical workflow modeling in obstetrics: hepatitis B in pregnancy. Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 2017; 245: 1336.
29. Loreto P., Fonseca F., Morais A., Peixoto H., Abelha A., Machado J. Improving maternity care with business intelligence. In: 2017 5th International Conference on Future Internet of Things and Cloud Workshops (FiCloudW). 2017: 170-7.
30. Georgieva A., Redman C.W.G., Papageorghiou A.T. Computerized data-driven interpretation of the intrapartum cardiotocogram: a cohort study. Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. 2017; 96(7): 883-91. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aogs.13136.
31. Yılmaz E. Fetal state assessment from cardiotocogram data using artificial neural networks. J. Med. Biol. Eng. 2016; 36(6): 820-32.
32. Van Calster B., Van Huffel S., Timmerman D., Kirk E., Bourne T., Condous G. Towards a clinical decision support system for pregnancies of unknown location. In: 2008 21st IEEE International Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems. 2008: 581-3.
33. Horner V., Rautenbach P., Mbananga N., Mashamba T., Kwinda H. An e-Health decision support system for improving compliance of health workers to the maternity care protocols in South Africa. Appl. Clin. Inform. 2013; 4(1): 25-36.
34. Merriel A., Murove B.T., Merriel S.W.D., Sibanda T., Moyo S., Crofts J. Implementation of a modified obstetric early warning system to improve the quality of obstetric care in Zimbabwe. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. 2017; 136(2): 175-9. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.12028.
35. Bolgova K.V., Kovalchuk S.V., Balakhontceva M.A., Zvartau N.E., Metsker O.G. Human computer interaction during clinical decision support with electronic health records improvement. Int. J. E-Health Med. Commun. 2020; 11(1): 93-106.
36. Клейменова Е.Б., Назаренко Г.И., Яшина Л.П., Пающик С.А. Проблема трансляции знаний в здравоохранении: инструменты для ее решения в области безопасности пациентов. Вестник Российской академии медицинских наук. 2018; 73(2): 105-14. [Kleymenova E.B., Nazarenko G.I., Payushchik S.A., Yashina L.P. The problem of knowledge translation in healthcare: tools for its solution in the area of patient safety. Vestnik Rossiiskoi akademii meditsinskikh nauk/Ann. Russ. Acad. Med. Sci. 2018; 73(2): 105-14. (in Russian)].
37. Abuhay T.M., Nigatie Y.G., Metsker O.G., Kovalchuk S.V. Investigating application of change point analysis in monitoring health condition of acute coronary syndrome patients. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2018; 136: 408-15.

Received 07.02.2020

Accepted 29.06.2020