Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

SAGETRACK

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Medical Decision Making
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wellman, M. P.
Right arrow Articles by Pauker, S. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Wellman, M. P.
Right arrow Articles by Pauker, S. G.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Automated Critiquing of Medical Decision Trees

Michael P. Wellman

Mark H. Eckman

Craig Fleming

Sharon L. Marshall

Frank A. Sonnenberg

Stephen G. Pauker

The authors developed a decision tree-critiquing program (called BUNYAN) that identifies potential modeling errors in medical decision trees. The program's critiques are based on the structure of a decision problem, obtained from an abstract description specifying only the basic semantic categories of the model's components. A taxonomy of node and branch types supplies the primitive building blocks for representing decision trees. BUNYAN detects potential problems in a model by matching general pattern expressions that refer to these primitives. A small set of general principles justifies critiquing rules that detect four categories of potential structural problems: impossible strategies, dominated strategies, unaccountable violations of symmetry, and omission of apparently reasonable strategies. Although critiquing based on structure alone has clear limitations, principled structural analysis constitutes the core of a methodology for reasoning about decision models. Key words: decision trees; computer-assisted critiquing. (Med Decis Making 1989;9:272-284)

Medical Decision Making, Vol. 9, No. 4, 272-284 (1989)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X8900900407


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Decision AnalysisHome page
S. G. Pauker and J. B. Wong
The Influence of Influence Diagrams in Medicine
Decision Analysis, December 1, 2005; 2(4): 238 - 244.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Med Decis MakingHome page
F. A. Sonnenberg, C. G. Hagerty, and C. A. Kulikowski
An Architecture for Knowledge-based Construction of Decision Models
Med Decis Making, February 1, 1994; 14(1): 27 - 39.
[Abstract] [PDF]