Expertise and the interpretation of computerized physiological data: implications for the design of computerized monitoring in neonatal intensive care

This paper presents the outcomes from a cognitive engineering project addressing the design problems of computerized monitoring in neonatal intensive care. Cognitive engineering is viewed, in this project, as a symbiosis between cognitive science and design practice. A range of methodologies has been used: interviews with neonatal staff, ward observations and experimental techniques. The results of these investigations are reported, focusing specifically on the differences between junior and senior physicians in their interpretation of monitored physiological data. It was found that the senior doctors made better use of the different knowledge sources available than the junior doctors. The senior doctors were able to identify more relevant physiological patterns and generated more and better inferences than did their junior colleagues. Expertise differences are discussed in the context of previous psychological research in medical expertise. Finally, the paper discusses the potential utility of these outcomes to inform the design of computerized decision support in neonatal intensive care

National Center for Biomedical Ontology: Advancing biomedicine through structured organization of scientific knowledge

The National Center for Biomedical Ontology is a consortium that comprises leading informaticians, biologists, clinicians, and ontologists, funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Roadmap, to develop innovative technology and methods that allow scientists to record, manage, and disseminate biomedical information and knowledge in machine-processable form. The goals of the Center are (1) to help unify the divergent and isolated efforts in ontology development by promoting high quality open-source, standards-based tools to create, manage, and use ontologies, (2) to create new software tools so that scientists can use ontologies to annotate and analyze biomedical data, (3) to provide a national resource for the ongoing evaluation, integration, and evolution of biomedical ontologies and associated tools and theories in the context of driving biomedical projects (DBPs), and (4) to disseminate the tools and resources of the Center and to identify, evaluate, and communicate best practices of ontology development to the biomedical community. Through the research activities within the Center, collaborations with the DBPs, and interactions with the biomedical community, our goal is to help scientists to work more effectively in the e-science paradigm, enhancing experiment design, experiment execution, data analysis, information synthesis, hypothesis generation and testing, and understand human disease

Beyond Research Ethics: Dialogues in Neuro-ICT Research

open access articleThe increasing use of information and communication technologies (ICTs) to help facilitate neuroscience adds a new level of complexity to the question of how ethical issues of such research can be identified and addressed. Current research ethics practice, based on ethics reviews by institutional review boards (IRB) and underpinned by ethical principlism, has been widely criticized. In this article, we develop an alternative way of approaching ethics in neuro-ICT research, based on discourse ethics, which implements Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) through dialogues. We draw on our work in Ethics Support, using the Human Brain Project (HBP) as empirical evidence of the viability of this approach

The Requirements for Ontologies in Medical Data Integration: A Case Study

Evidence-based medicine is critically dependent on three sources of information: a medical knowledge base, the patients medical record and knowledge of available resources, including where appropriate, clinical protocols. Patient data is often scattered in a variety of databases and may, in a distributed model, be held across several disparate repositories. Consequently addressing the needs of an evidence-based medicine community presents issues of biomedical data integration, clinical interpretation and knowledge management. This paper outlines how the Health-e-Child project has approached the challenge of requirements specification for (bio-) medical data integration, from the level of cellular data, through disease to that of patient and population. The approach is illuminated through the requirements elicitation and analysis of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA), one of three diseases being studied in the EC-funded Health-e-Child project.Comment: 6 pages, 1 figure. Presented at the 11th International Database Engineering & Applications Symposium (Ideas2007). Banff, Canada September 200

Lessons Learned from a 10-Year Collaboration Between Biomedical Engineering and Industrial Design Students in Capstone Design Projects

Engineers and industrial designers have different approaches to problem solving. Both place heavy emphasis on identification of customer needs, manufacturing methods, and prototyping. Industrial designers focus on aesthetics, ergonomics, ease of use, manufacturing methods, and the user’s experience. They tend to be more visual and more concerned with the interaction between users and products. Engineers focus on functionality, performance requirements, analytical modeling, and design verification and validation. They tend to be more analytical and more concerned with the design of internal components and product performance. Engineers and industrial designers often work together on project teams in industry. Collaboration between the two groups on senior capstone design projects can teach each to respect and value the unique contributions each brings to the project team, result in improved design solutions, and help prepare students for future collaboration in industry. Student feedback and lessons learned by faculty and students from a ten-year collaboration between engineering and industrial design students from Marquette University and the Milwaukee Institute of Art and Design, respectively, are presented. Students learned to communicate with people in other disciplines, appreciate the complementary skills of each discipline, and value different approaches to problem solving