Dear Helen,
At the moment we have some structure with a patient, who has one or more
studies, each of which has one or more images associated with it. each
image has zero or more lesions associated with it.
We're working with a dataset of ~400 mammogram reports, and using this
as the basis for the developing the ontology (to check coverage, etc.).
As a result, the patient info is reasonably sparse (as not much/ if
anything is supplied, apart from some demographic info for most
patients). The lesion info is really where there's a bit more detail -
calcification, masses, etc. and a little bit more at the study level
(reporting BIRADS category, etc.).
Does that answer your questions? What we've done is fairly sparse at the
moment, but in theory shouldn't take that long to flesh out, at least to
the level you've described. I'm guessing AGFA has done a bit more on
this - do you have any pointers/ papers/ work to suggest.
Thanks,
Matt
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Matt
Can you elaborate on what aspects of mammography you include in your
ontology? I am interested in the diagnostic aspect, i.e. image
features, patient clinical information and the diagnosis to breast
cancer.
Kind regards.
Helen
*Matt Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>*
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
02/12/2008 01:35 PM
To
public-semweb-lifesci hcls <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
cc
Subject
Mammographic ontology
Dear All,
Have just been reading the wiki. I note that there is a section on doing
a mammogram as a screening test. I have been doing some work on a
mammographic ontology, which we might be able to contribute (need to
talk to other authors).
Would this be useful?
How can I align it with existing terms (e.g. from GALEN, etc.)?
Matt
--
http://acl.icnet.uk/~mw
http://adhominem.blogsome.com/
+44 (0)7834 899570
--
http://acl.icnet.uk/~mw
http://adhominem.blogsome.com/
+44 (0)7834 899570
