Court Judgment Decision Support System Based on Medical Text Mining

Medical damage is a common problem faced by hospitals around the world and is widely watched by countries and the World Health Organization. As the number of medical damage dispute lawsuit cases rapidly grows, many countries in the world face the problem how to improve the efficiency of the judicial system under the premise of guaranteeing the quality of the trial. Therefore, in addition to reforming the system, the decision support system will effectively improve judicial decisions. This paper takes medical damage judgment documents in China as example, and proposes a court judgment decision support system (CJ-DSS) based on medical text mining and the automatic classification technology. The system can predict the trail results of the new lawsuit documents according to the previous cases verdict - rejected and non-rejected. Combined with the cases, the study in this paper found that combined feature extraction method does improve the performance of three kinds of classifiers - Support Value Machine (SVM), Artificial Neural Network (ANN) and K-Nearest Neighbor (KNN), the degree of improved performance is different from using DF-CHI combined feature extraction method. In addition, integrated learning algorithm also improves the classification performance of the overall system

Causation’s Nuclear Future: Applying Proportional Liability to the Price-Anderson Act

For more than a quarter century, public discourse has pushed the nuclear-power industry in the direction of heavier regulation and greater scrutiny, effectively halting construction of new reactors. By focusing on contemporary fear of significant accidents, such discourse begs the question of what the nation\u27s court system would actually do should a major nuclear incident cause radiation-induced cancers. Congress\u27s attempt to answer that question is the Price-Anderson Act, a broad statute addressing claims by the victims of a major nuclear accident. Lower courts interpreting the Act have repeatedly encountered a major stumbling block: it declares that judges must apply the antediluvian preponderance-of-the-evidence logic of state tort law, even though radiation science insists that the causes of radiation-induced cancers are more complex. After a major nuclear accident, the Act\u27s paradoxically outdated rules for adjudicating causation would make post-incident compensation unworkable. This Note urges that nuclear-power-plant liability should not turn on eighteenth-century tort law. Drawing on modern scientific conclusions regarding the invariably statistical nature of cancer, this Note suggests a unitary federal standard for the Price-Anderson Act—that a defendant be deemed to have caused a plaintiff\u27s injury in direct proportion to the increased risk of harm the defendant has imposed. This proportional liability rule would not only fairly evaluate the costs borne by injured plaintiffs and protect a reawakening nuclear industry from the prospect of bank-breaking litigation, but would prove workable with only minor changes to the Price-Anderson Act\u27s standards of injury and fault

William H. Sorrell, Attorney General of Vermont, et al. v. IMS Health Inc., et al. - Amicus Brief in Support of Petitioners

On April 26, 2011, the US Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the Vermont data mining case, Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc. Respondents claim this is the most important commercial speech case in a decade. Petitioner (the State of Vermont) argues this is the most important medical privacy case since Whalen v. Roe. The is an amicus brief supporting Vermont, written by law professors and submitted on behalf of the New England Journal of Medicin