
doi: 10.1007/bf01000271
pmid: 1289466
Iliad 4.0 and QMR 2.03 are computer-based diagnostic knowledge bases that can play many roles in decision support and other areas of medical practice, but neither appears ready to assume the role of an expert diagnostic consultant. In contrast to human experts, these programs have problems related to recognition of their own limitations, interpretation of continuous data, recognition of dependent findings, selection of tests, and description of the impact of certain tests. Suggestions to improve these aspects of knowledge bases are offered.
Reproducibility of Results, Bayes Theorem, Expert Systems, Decision Support Techniques, Diagnosis, Differential, Artificial Intelligence, Internal Medicine, Prevalence, Humans, New Hampshire, Clinical Competence
Reproducibility of Results, Bayes Theorem, Expert Systems, Decision Support Techniques, Diagnosis, Differential, Artificial Intelligence, Internal Medicine, Prevalence, Humans, New Hampshire, Clinical Competence
| citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 5 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
