There are a variety of authoring tools and methods for producing computer-interpretable clinical guideline (CIG). This work is a review of the evaluation of tools and methods currently in use to author CIGs. The aim of this paper is to present the results of a literature review on the evaluation criteria. Both controlled database search and a subsequent snowballing were used to identify relevant literature. The evaluation criteria and evaluation methods of CIG-related themes were manually identified in the found literature. Based on the 32 relevant papers found, 68 evaluation criteria were identified which were then classified into ten themes. We identified the most and least frequently mentioned areas of concern in evaluation which indicate areas that have been neglected in system evaluation.
['Soudabeh Khodambashi', 'Laura Slaughter', 'Øystein Nytrø']
Computer-Interpretable Clinical Guidelines: A Review and Analysis of Evaluation Criteria for Authoring Methods.