Argumentation Analytics for Treatment Deliberations in Multimorbidity Cases: An Introduction to Two Artificial Intelligence Approaches |
| |
Authors: | Walton Douglas Oliveira Tiago Satoh Ken Mebane Waleed |
| |
Affiliation: | 1.Centre for Research on Reasoning, Argumentation and Rhetoric, University of Windsor, 401 Sunset Avenue, Windsor, ON, N9B 3P4, Canada ;2.Ridge-i/Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, Japan ;3.Principles of Informatics Research Division, National Institute of Informatics, Chiyoda-ku, 2-1-2, Hitotsubashi, Tokyo, 101-8430, Japan ;4.Argumentation Studies Doctoral Program c/o Philosophy Department, University of Windsor, 401 Sunset Ave., Windsor, ON, N9B 3P4, Canada ; |
| |
Abstract: | Multimorbidity, the presence of multiple health conditions that must be addressed, is a particularly difficult situation in patient management raising issues such as the use of multiple drugs and drug-disease interactions. Clinical Guidelines are evidence-based statements which provide recommendations for specific health conditions but are unfit for the management of multiple co-occurring health situations. To leverage these evidence-based documents, it becomes necessary to combine them. In this paper, using a case example, we explore the use of argumentation schemes to reason and combine evidence-based recommendations from clinical guidelines, expected effects, conflicts stemming from said recommendations, and preferences regarding treatment goals. We compare the results of reasoning using the schemes for practical reasoning and argument from negative consequences in the Carneades Argumentation System with those of ASPIC-G, an extension of the artificial intelligence system ASPIC+. |
| |
Keywords: | |
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录! |
|