用论证解决临床指南中的冲突
Resolving Conflicts in Clinical Guidelines using Argumentation
摘要：
在以患者为中心的医疗推理中，需要考虑患者特定的条件和目标，自动推理与冲突的通用临床指南是一个紧迫的问题。在存在偏好（例如患者的愿望和临床医生的优先级高于目标）的情况下，这甚至更具挑战性。我们提出了一个结构化的论证形式主义的推理与冲突的临床指南，病人的具体信息和偏好。我们的形式主义集成了基于推理的推理和目标驱动的推理结果之间的选择。具体来说，我们假设适用性的指南建议有关的通用目标的病人的福祉，解决冲突的建议使用患者的条件和偏好，然后考虑优先以患者为中心的目标，以产生非冲突，目标最大化和偏好尊重的建议。我们依靠最先进的基于过渡的医疗建议模型来表示指南建议，并通过患者的条件，目标以及对建议和目标的偏好来增强它。我们建立理想的属性，我们的方法在敏感性的建议冲突和病人的情况。
英文摘要：
Automatically reasoning with conflicting generic clinical guidelines is a burning issue in patient-centric medical reasoning where patient-specific conditions and goals need to be taken into account. It is even more challenging in the presence of preferences such as patient's wishes and clinician's priorities over goals. We advance a structured argumentation formalism for reasoning with conflicting clinical guidelines, patient-specific information and preferences. Our formalism integrates assumption-based reasoning and goal-driven selection among reasoning outcomes. Specifically, we assume applicability of guideline recommendations concerning the generic goal of patient well-being, resolve conflicts among recommendations using patient's conditions and preferences, and then consider prioritised patient-centered goals to yield non-conflicting, goal-maximising and preference-respecting recommendations. We rely on the state-of-the-art Transition-based Medical Recommendation model for representing guideline recommendations and augment it with context given by the patient's conditions, goals, as well as preferences over recommendations and goals. We establish desirable properties of our approach in terms of sensitivity to recommendation conflicts and patient context.
机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来，可能存在错误，请以论文正文为准。
