1
The Ontologically Privileged Status of the Past
Barry Smith
2
Universals vs. instances
Assertions in scientific texts pertain to universals in reality
Assertions in a lab report pertain (also) to instances of these universals
3
Universals are those invariants in realitywhich make possible
• the use of general terms in scientific inquiry
• the use of standardized therapies in clinical care
• the use of standardized procedures in business transactions
• ...
4
universals instances / particulars
scientific texts, dictionaries
diaries, biographies, histories, journalism
medical ontologies, terminologies
clinical records, lab reports, X-ray images
macroeconomic surveyscredit card transaction
records
databases
5
universals / concepts instances / particulars
scientific texts, dictionaries
diaries, biographies, histories, journalism
medical ontologies, terminologies
clinical records
macroeconomic surveyscredit card transaction
records
databases
relate indiscriminately to past, present and future
6
universals / concepts instances / particulars
scientific texts, dictionaries
diaries, biographies, histories, journalism
medical ontologies, terminologies
clinical records, lab reports, X-ray images
macroeconomic surveyscredit card transaction
records
relate only to the past
7
universals instances / particulars
scientific texts, dictionaries
diaries, biographies, histories, journalism
medical ontologies, terminologies
clinical records
macroeconomic surveyscredit card transaction
records
databases
8
universals / concepts instances / particulars
scientific texts, dictionaries
diaries, biographies, histories, journalism
medical ontologies, terminologies
clinical records
macroeconomic surveyscredit card transaction
records
databases
9UMLS Semantic Network
10
Pleural Cavity
Pleural Cavity
Interlobar recess
Interlobar recess
Mesothelium of Pleura
Mesothelium of Pleura
Pleura(Wall of Sac)
Pleura(Wall of Sac)
VisceralPleura
VisceralPleura
Pleural SacPleural Sac
Parietal Pleura
Parietal Pleura
Anatomical SpaceAnatomical Space
OrganCavityOrganCavity
Serous SacCavity
Serous SacCavity
AnatomicalStructure
AnatomicalStructure
OrganOrgan
Serous SacSerous Sac
MediastinalPleura
MediastinalPleura
TissueTissue
Organ PartOrgan Part
Organ Subdivision
Organ Subdivision
Organ Component
Organ Component
Organ CavitySubdivision
Organ CavitySubdivision
Serous SacCavity
Subdivision
Serous SacCavity
Subdivision
Foundational Model of Anatomy
11
Pleural Cavity
Pleural Cavity
Interlobar recess
Interlobar recess
Mesothelium of Pleura
Mesothelium of Pleura
Pleura(Wall of Sac)
Pleura(Wall of Sac)
VisceralPleura
VisceralPleura
Pleural SacPleural Sac
Parietal Pleura
Parietal Pleura
Anatomical SpaceAnatomical Space
OrganCavityOrganCavity
Serous SacCavity
Serous SacCavity
AnatomicalStructure
AnatomicalStructure
OrganOrgan
Serous SacSerous Sac
MediastinalPleura
MediastinalPleura
TissueTissue
Organ PartOrgan Part
Organ Subdivision
Organ Subdivision
Organ Component
Organ Component
Organ CavitySubdivision
Organ CavitySubdivision
Serous SacCavity
Subdivision
Serous SacCavity
Subdivision
part
_of
is_a
12
Gene
Ontology
13
Gene
Ontology
14
Holy grail of biomedical informatics = integration of genomic and EHR
data Main obstacles
1. Poor facility for dealing with time and instances / particulars in current ontologies
2. Poor facility for dealing with instances / particulars in current clinical record systems
15
Current ontologies are about meanings (‘concepts’, ‘conceptualizations’)
16
The Ontologically Privileged Status of Universals
17
The Ontologically Privileged Status of Universals (a.k.a. Concepts)
18
?
The concept diabetes mellitus becomes ‘associated with a diabetic patient’
concept patient concept diabetes
what it is on the
side of the patient?
19
?
The concept diabetes mellitus becomes ‘associated with a diabetic patient’
concept patient concept diabetes
what it is on the
side of the patient?What is the relation here? Not a relation between concepts
20
A contains B =defthe concept A stands in a containment relation
to the concept B
A causes B =def the concept A stands in a causative relation to
the concept B
A is_a B =def. ‘A’ is more specific in meaning than ‘B’
21
GALEN
vomitus contains carrot
22
UMLS Semantic Network:
Food causes Experimental Model of Disease
Biomedical or Dental Material causes Mental or Behavioral Dysfunction
Manufactured Object causes Disease or Syndrome
23
vomitus contains carrot
The authors of ontologies have not paid attention to the question whether these are all or some assertions
24
because they have not paid attention to instances
some instances of vomitus contain instances of carrot
all instances of vomitus contain instances of carrot
25
IFOMIS proposal:
move from associative relations between concepts/meanings to
strictly defined relations between the universals (types, kinds) in
reality
embraced also by Gene Ontology Consortium
26
Key idea
Ontological relations like
contains, part_of, causes
are relations between universals,
but to define them properly we need to take account of instances and of time
27
Three kinds of relations
<universal, universal>: is_a, part_of, ...
<instance, universal>: this throb here and now instance_of the class throb
<instance, instance>: Mary’s heart part_of Mary at t
28
part_of
A part_of B =def.given any particular a and any time t, if a is an instance of A at t,then there is some instance b of B such that a is an instance-level part_of b at t
HAS ALL-SOME FORM
29
transformation_of
c at t1
C
c at t
C1
time
same instance
mature RNA transformation_of pre-RNAadult transformation_of child
30
transformation_of
A transformation_of B =def
for all a, t, if a is an instance of A at t then there is some t´ earlier than t which is such that a is an instance of B at t´
HAS ALL-SOME FORM
31
transformation_ofin short:
A transformation_of B =def. any instance of A was
at some earlier time an instance of B
Contrast:
A transforms_into B
child transforms_into adult
The ontologically privileged status of relations
pointing towards the past
32
C
c at t c at t1
C1
embryological development
33
C
c at t c at t1
C1
tumor development
34
Advantages of the methodology of enforcing commonly accepted
coherent definitions
promote quality assurance (better coding)
guarantee automatic reasoning across ontologies and across data at different granularities
yields direct connection to times and instances in EHR
35
The story of Jane Smith
(with thanks to Werner Ceusters)
36
Jane’s favourite supermarket
July 4th, 1990: Jane goes shopping:
The freezer section of Jane’s favourite supermarket
The only available warning sign used outside
A very suspiciously shaped upper leg
37
A visit to the hospital City Health Centre Dr. Peters
(City HC) Dr. Longley
38
Diagnosis: a severe spiral fracture of the femur
39
The City HC’s medical record
captures in a structured form all of the ‘clinically significant’ information in the narrative notes
Rector AL, Nowlan WA, Kay S, Goble CA, Howkins TJ.A framework for modelling the electronic medical record.Methods Inf Med. 1993 Apr;32(2):109-19.
40
Structured Medical Record
www.medappz.com/
04/07/1990 – 17:10Dr. Peters
Jane SmithOrthopedics
Emergency visit: 04/07/1990 – 17.00
Severe
Left upper leg
Since fall on floor
Constant
26442006 closed fracture of shaft of femur
81134009 fracture, closed, spiral
41
CityHC’s representation formalismfor statements in records
Occurrences: “are specific occurrences of individuals and must be situated in space and time. The most importantgroup of occurrences are observations — i.e. agents’ observations of individuals.”
42
City HC’s EHR model
43
Rector et al:“Every occurrence level statement concerning the Jane
Smith’s Fracture of the Femur is an observation of the corresponding individual.”
“The existence of the individual Jane Smith’s Fracture of Femur does not imply that Jane Smith has, or has ever had, a fracture of the femur, but merely that some observation has been made about Jane Smith regarding a fracture of the femur.”
“(The only observation recorded about Jane Smith’s Fracture of the Femur might be that she did not have it.)”
44
5572 04/07/1990 26442006 closed fracture of shaft of femur
5572 04/07/1990 81134009 Fracture, closed, spiral
5572 12/07/1990 26442006 closed fracture of shaft of femur
5572 12/07/1990 9001224 Accident in public building (supermarket)
5572 04/07/1990 79001 Essential hypertension
0939 24/12/1991 255174002 benign polyp of biliary tract
2309 21/03/1992 26442006 closed fracture of shaft of femur
2309 21/03/1992 9001224 Accident in public building (supermarket)
47804 03/04/1993 58298795 Other lesion on other specified region
5572 17/05/1993 79001 Essential hypertension
298 22/08/1993 2909872 Closed fracture of radial head
298 22/08/1993 9001224 Accident in public building (supermarket)
5572 01/04/1997 26442006 closed fracture of shaft of femur
5572 01/04/1997 79001 Essential hypertension
PtID Date ObsCode Narrative
0939 20/12/1998 255087006 malignant polyp of biliary tract
Same patient, same hypertension code:Same (numerically identical) hypertension ?
Different patients, same fracture codes:Same (numerically identical) fracture ?
Same patient, different dates, same fracture
codes: same (numerically identical)
fracture ?
Same patient, same date,2 different fracture codes:
same (numerically identical) fracture ?
ProblemsDifferent patients. Same supermarket? Maybe the same (irrelevant ?) freezer section ?Or different supermarkets, but always in the freezer sections ?
Same patient, different dates, Different codes. Same (numericallyidentical) polyp ?
45
Main problems of EHRsStatements refer only implicitly to the concrete
entities about which they give information.Codes are general: they tell us only that some
instance of the class the codes refer to, is referred to in the statement, but not what instance precisely.
Mixing up the act of observation and the thing observed.
Mixing up statements and the entities these statements refer to.
46
ConsequencesDifficult to:
– count the number of (numerically) different diseases
• Bad statistics on incidence, prevalence, ...• Bad basis for health cost containment
– relate (numerically the same or different) causal factors to disorders:
– Dangerous public places (specific work floors, swimming pools), HIV contaminated blood from donors, food from unhygienic source, ...
• Hampers prevention
47
Proposed solution:
Referent Tracking
Purpose:– explicit reference to the concrete individual
entities relevant to the accurate description of each patient’s condition, therapies, outcomes, ...
Method:– Introduce an Instance Unique Identifier (IUI)
for each relevant particular / instance
48
CUI (coo-ey): Concept Unique Identifier (e.g. a SNOMED code)
UUI (oo-ey): Universal Unique Identifier
IUI (you-ey): Instance Unique Identifier (e.g. a Social Security Number)
49
Referent tracking
a response to the hard NLP problem of reference resolution in running text
50
OntologyAn ontology is a representation of some pre-existing domain of reality which
(1) reflects the properties of the objects within its domain in such a way that there obtains a systematic correlation between reality and the representation itself,
(2) is intelligible to a domain expert
(3) is formalized in a way that allows it to support automatic information processing
51
Basic Formal OntologyContinuants Occurrents / Events
endure identically through time while undergoing changes, including gaining and losing parts
unfold themselves through time in successive temporal phases
52
Basic Formal OntologyContinuants Occurrents
Independent: things, substances
Always dependent on their bearers (participants/agents)Dependent:
functions, qualities, shapes, roles ...
53
An ontological analysis
continuantsCity HC
The freezer section of Jane’s favourite supermarket
Jane’s left femur
Jane’s left femur fracture
Jane Smith
Dr. Peters
Jane’s left femur
Jane’s fracture’s image
Dr. Longley
City HC’s EHR system
t
UniversalsEHR system
HC
Freezer section
Person
Femur
Fracture
Image
Jane’s fallingJane’s femur breakingDr. Peter’s examination of Jane’s fractureDr. Peter’s ordering of an X-rayShooting the pictures of Jane’s leg
occurrents
Jane’s fracture’s healingDr. Peter’s diagnosis making
Jane diesFreezer section dismantledDr. Longley’s examination of Jane’ s fracture
54
Essentials of Referent Tracking
Deciding what particulars should receive a IUI;Finding out whether or not a particular has already
been assigned a IUI; Using IUIs in the EHR, resolve issues concerning
the syntax and semantics of statements containing IUIs;
Correcting errors in the assignment of IUIs;Dealing with relation between IUI-identified
instances and corresponding universals
55
Architecture of aReferent Tracking System (RTS)
Ideally set up to be as geographically broad in scope as possible
Services:– IUI generator– IUI repository: statements about assignments and
reservations– Referent Tracking Database (RTDB): statements
relating instances to instances and universals
56
IUI generationUniversally Unique IDs:
– recently standardized through ISO/IEC 9834-8:2004,
– specifies format and generation rules enabling users to produce 128-bit identifiers that have a very high probability of being globally unique
– Meaningless strings
57
IUI assignment= an act of labelling carried out by the first
cognitive agent needing to acknowledge the existence of a particular it has information about
cognitive agent:– A person– An organisation– A device or software agent, e.g.
• Bank note printer• Image analysis software• Credit card transaction reader
58
Criteria for IUI assignment (1)
The particular’s existence must be determined:– Easy for persons in front of you, for body parts, for X-
ray images– More difficult for subjective symptoms– No need to know what the particular exactly is, i.e.
which universal it instantiates– No need to be able to point to it precisely
• One bee out of a particular swarm that stung the patient
59
Criteria for IUI assignment (2)The particular should not have been already
determined as something else:• Morning star / evening star• May not have already been assigned a IUI.
Must be salient/relevant/significant:• Personal decision, (scientific) community guideline, ... • Reflects a possibility offered by the EHR system• Once a IUI has been assigned, everybody making
statements about this particular should use it
60
IUI assignmentsThe act of IUI assignment can be represented as:
<da , Ai , td>
da = IUI of the registering agent
Ai = <pa, pp, tap, c>
pa = IUI of the author of the assertion
pp = IUI of the particular
tap = time of assignment
c = optional description
td = time of registering Ai in the IUI-repository
Neither ‘td’ nor ‘tap’ give any information about when
#pp began to exist.
61
Management of IUI-repositoryAdequate safety and security provisions
– Access authorisation, control, read/write, ...– Pseudonymisation
Deletionless but with facilities for correcting mistakes.
Central management with adequate search facilities.
62
Representation in the EHR
Relevant particulars referred to using IUIs
Relationships that obtain between particulars at time t expressed using strictly defined relations from an ontology
Statements describing for each particular at time t of what universal from an ontology it is an instance
CityHC Dr. PetersJane
Smith
JaneSmith’s
FractureOf Femur
FractureOf Femur
SevereSpiral
Jane Smith’sconsultation withDr. Peters atCity HC on 4th July1990
Dr. Peters’assessment ofJane Smith’sfracture offemur atCity HC on 4th July1990
JaneSmith’s
FractureOf Femur’s
severity
JaneSmith’s
FractureOf Femur’s
shape
4th July 1990
63
PtoP (particular to particular) statements ordered sextuples of the form: <sa, ta, r, o, P, tr>
sa the IUI of the author of the statement,
ta the time when the statement is made,
r a relationship obtaining between the particulars referred to in P,o the ontology from which r is taken,P an ordered list of the IUIs of the particulars between which r obtains, tr the time at which r obtains.
64
PtoCL (particular to class) statements
<sa, ta, inst, o, p, cl, tr>
sa the IUI of the author of the statement,
ta the time when the statement is made,
inst an instance relationship available in o obtainingbetween p and cl,
o the ontology from which inst and cl are taken,p the IUI of the particular whose inst relationship with cl
is asserted,cl the class in o to which p enjoys the inst relationship, tr the time at which the relationship obtains.
65
PtoCO (particular to concept code)
statements <sa, ta, cbs, p, co, tr>
sa the IUI of the author of the statement,
ta the time when the statement is made,
cbs the concept-based system from which co is taken,p the IUI of the particular which the author associates
with co,co the concept-code in cbs which the author associates with p, tr a reference to the time at which the author considers the
association appropriate,
66
Interpretation of PtoCO statements
Such statements tell us that within the linguistic and scientific community in which cbs is used, the terms associated with co may be used to denote p
67
A SNOMED-CT example <IUI-0945, 18/04/2005, SNOMED-CT v0301, IUI-
1921, 367720001, forever>• #IUI-0945: author of the statement• #IUI-1921: the left testicle of patient #IUI-78127• 367720001: the SNOMED concept-code to which “left testis” is
(in SNOMED) attached as term
So we can denote #IUI-1921 by means of• that left testis• that entire left testis• that testicle, that male gonad, that testis• that genital structure• that physical anatomical entity• BUT NOT: that SNOMED-CT concept
68
Pragmatics of IUIs in EHRsIUI assignment requires (just a bit) more effort compared to
current use of general codes from concept-based systems– A search for concept-codes is replaced by a search for the
appropriate IUI using exactly the same mechanisms• Browsing• Code-finder software• Auto-coding software (CLEF NLP software Andrea Setzer)
– With some IUIs there comes a wealth of already registered information
69
IUIs in structured EHRs
www.medappz.com/
04/07/1990 – 17:10Dr. Peters
Jane SmithOrthopedics
Emergency visit: 04/07/1990 – 17.00
Severe
Left upper leg
Since fall on floor
Constant
26442006 closed fracture of shaft of femur
81134009 fracture, closed, spiral
Replaced by the IUI for thepatient’s left upper legThat IUI might be found byusing “left upper leg” as asearch term to query theRTDB
Both replaced by the IUI for that fractureBy means of PTCO statements is the IUI relatedto the SNOMED-codes
70
Advantage: betterreality
representation5572 04/07/1990 26442006 closed fracture of shaft of femur
5572 04/07/1990 81134009 Fracture, closed, spiral
5572 12/07/1990 26442006 closed fracture of shaft of femur
5572 12/07/1990 9001224 Accident in public building (supermarket)
5572 04/07/1990 79001 Essential hypertension
0939 24/12/1991 255174002 benign polyp of biliary tract
2309 21/03/1992 26442006 closed fracture of shaft of femur
2309 21/03/1992 9001224 Accident in public building (supermarket)
47804 03/04/1993 58298795 Other lesion on other specified region
5572 17/05/1993 79001 Essential hypertension
298 22/08/1993 2909872 Closed fracture of radial head
298 22/08/1993 9001224 Accident in public building (supermarket)
5572 01/04/1997 26442006 closed fracture of shaft of femur
5572 01/04/1997 79001 Essential hypertension
PtID Date ObsCode Narrative
0939 20/12/1998 255087006 malignant polyp of biliary tract
IUI-001
IUI-001
IUI-001
IUI-003
IUI-004
IUI-004
IUI-005
IUI-005
IUI-005
IUI-007
IUI-007
IUI-007
IUI-002
IUI-012
71
Other AdvantagesMappings between ontologies and coding
systems created as by-product of tracking– Descriptions about the same particular using
different systems e.g. in different hospitals
Quality control of ontologies and concept-based systems– Systematically inconsistent descriptions within
or across terminologies may indicate poor definition of the respective terms
72
Other advantages
credit card transaction records already constitute a referent tracking database
can give a global picture of economic patterns in a given society
Our proposal will provide for something analogous in the realm of healthcare
73
Other AdvantagesReferent tracking can be used in decision
support when making diagnoses
We can consider the results of assignment of different clinical codes to one and the same collection of IUIs assembled over a period (and thereby uncover new patterns of symptoms, e.g. in a case of multiple sclerosis)
74
ConclusionReferent tracking can solve a number of
problems in an elegant way.Existing (or emerging) technologies can be
used for the implementation.Old technologies can play an interesting
role.Big Brother feeling is to be expected, but
with adequate measures easy to fight.Pilot is being established
75
Generalizing beyond healthcare1) intelligence/security: tracking movements of people and
goods2) tracking copies of papers, music-files, over the internet.
Numbers can be assigned by producers of the files, but also by the people who forward them (buying and selling numbers)
3) creation of tag-technology for all forms of hardware/collectibles
4) gaming (turning spam into a game): collaborative, distributed story writing
5) gambling/play mixture: a question is asked, and every tenth, twentieth, ... person who calls the TV studio is allowed to answer. But calling costs you $1. Referent tracking allows this idea to be realized over email/internet.