Skip to main content

Reusing a Declarative Specification to Check the Conformance of Different CIGs

  • Conference paper
Book cover Business Process Management Workshops (BPM 2011)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing ((LNBIP,volume 100))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Several Computer Interpretable Guidelines (CIGs) languages have been proposed by the health community. Even though these CIG languages share common ideas each language has to be provided with his own mechanism of verification. In an earlier work we have shown that a DECLARE model can be used for checking the conformance of a PROforma CIG. In this paper, we show that the same model can also be used for checking the conformance of a similar CIG expressed in the GLIF language. Besides, as the GLIF model has been expressed in terms of a Coloured Petri Net (CPN), we also elaborate on the experiences obtained when applying the model checking techniques supported by CPN tools.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Quaglini, S., Stefanelli, M., Lanzola, G., Caporusso, V., Panzarasa, S.: Flexible guideline-based patient careflow systems. Journal AIME 22, 65–80 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Advani, A., Shahar, Y., Musen, M.A.: Medical Quality Assessment by Scoring Adherence to Guideline Intentions. In: AMIA 2001 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Groot, P., Hommersom, A., Lucas, P.J.F., Robbert-Jan, M., ten Teije, A., Harmelen, F.V.: Using model checking for critiquing based on clinical guidelines. Journal AIME 46, 19–36 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bottrighi, A., Chesani, F., Mello, P., Molino, G., Montali, M., Montani, S., Storari, S., Terenziani, P., Torchio, M.: A Hybrid Approach to Clinical Guideline and to Basic Medical Knowledge Conformance. In: Combi, C., Shahar, Y., Abu-Hanna, A. (eds.) AIME 2009. LNCS, vol. 5651, pp. 91–95. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Grando, M.A., Schonenberg, M.H., van der Aalst, W.: Semantic Process Mining for the verification of medical recommendations. In: Int. Conf. of Health Informatics 2011, Rome, pp. 5–16 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bäumler, S., Balser, M., Dunets, A., Reif, W., Schmitt, J.: Verification of Medical Guidelines by Model Checking – A Case Study. In: Valmari, A. (ed.) SPIN 2006. LNCS, vol. 3925, pp. 219–233. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Giordano, L., Terenziani, P., Bottrighi, A., Montani, S., Donzella, L.: Model checking for clinical guidelines: an agent-based approach. In: AMIA, pp. 289–293 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Marcos, M., Balser, M., ten Teije, A., van Harmelen, F., Duelli, C.: Experiences in the Formalisation and Verification of Medical Protocols. In: Dojat, M., Keravnou, E.T., Barahona, P. (eds.) AIME 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2780, pp. 132–141. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Peleg, M., Tu, S.W., Bury, J., Ciccarese, P., Fox, J., et al.: Comparing Computer-Interpretable Guideline Models: A Case-Study Approach. JAMIA 10(1), 55–68 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Irwin, R.S., Boulet, L.S., Cloutier, M.M., et al.: Managing Cough as a Defense Mechanism and as a Symptom, A Consensus Panel Report of the American College of Chest Physicians. Chest 114(2), 133–181 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. van der Aalst, W.M.P., Pesic, M., Schonenberg, H.: Declarative Workflows: Balancing Between Flexibility and Support. Computer Science - Research and Development 23(2), 99–113 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Mulyar, N., Pesic, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Peleg, M.: Towards Flexibility in Clinical Guideline Modelling Languages. In: 1st International Workshop on Process-oriented Information Systems in Healthcare, pp. 24–29 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  13. van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Process Mining: Discovery. Conformance and Enhancement of Business Processes. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Alves De Medeiros, A.K., Günther, C.W.: Process Mining: Using CPN Tools to Create Test Logs for Mining Algorithms. In: Proc. of the Sixth Workshop and Tutorial on Practical Use of CPNs and the CPN Tools, pp. 177–190 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Grando, M.A., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Mans, R.S. (2012). Reusing a Declarative Specification to Check the Conformance of Different CIGs. In: Daniel, F., Barkaoui, K., Dustdar, S. (eds) Business Process Management Workshops. BPM 2011. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 100. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28115-0_19

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28115-0_19

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-28114-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-28115-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics