Group decision making in health care : A case study of multidisciplinary meetings
- Authors: Sharma, Vishakha , Stranieri, Andrew , Burstein, Frada , Warren, Jim , Daly, Sharon , Patterson, Louise , Yearwood, John , Wolff, Alan
- Date: 2016
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Journal of Decision Systems Vol. 25, no. (2016), p. 476-485
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Abstract: Recent studies have demonstrated that Multi-Disciplinary Meetings (MDM) practiced in some medical contexts can contribute to positive health care outcomes. The group reasoning and decision-making in MDMs has been found to be most effective when deliberations revolve around the patient’s needs, comprehensive information is available during the meeting, core members attend and the MDM is effectively facilitated. This article presents a case study of the MDMs in cancer care in a region of Australia. The case study draws on a group reasoning model called the Reasoning Community model to analyse MDM deliberations to illustrate that many factors are important to support group reasoning, not solely the provision of pertinent information. The case study has implications for the use of data analytics in any group reasoning context. © 2016 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
A comparison of machine learning algorithms for multilabel classification of CAN
- Authors: Kelarev, Andrei , Stranieri, Andrew , Yearwood, John , Jelinek, Herbert
- Date: 2012
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Advances in Computer Science and Engineering Vol. 9, no. 1 (2012), p. 1-4
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: This article is devoted to the investigation and comparison of several important machine learning algorithms in their ability to obtain multilabel classifications of the stages of cardiac autonomic neuropathy (CAN). Data was collected by the Diabetes Complications Screening Research Initiative at Charles Sturt University. Our experiments have achieved better results than those published previously in the literature for similar CAN identification tasks.
Rule-based classifiers and meta classifiers for identification of cardiac autonomic neuropathy progression
- Authors: Jelinek, Herbert , Kelarev, Andrei , Stranieri, Andrew , Yearwood, John
- Date: 2012
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: International Journal of Information Science and Computer Mathematics Vol. 5, no. 2 (2012), p. 49-53
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: We investigate and compare several rule-based classifiers and meta classifiers in their ability to obtain multi-class classifications of cardiac autonomic neuropathy (CAN) and its progression. The best results obtained in our experiments are significantly better than the outcomes published previously in the literature for analogous CAN identification tasks or simpler binary classification tasks.
Does the Delphi process lead to increased accuracy in group-based judgmental forecasts or does it simply induce consensus amongst judgmental forecasters?
- Authors: Bolger, Fergus , Stranieri, Andrew , Wright, George , Yearwood, John
- Date: 2011
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Technological Forecasting and Social Change Vol. , no. (2011), p.
- Full Text: false
- Reviewed:
- Description: We investigate the relative impact of internal Delphi process factors - including panelists' degree of confidence, expertise, majority/minority positioning - and an external factor, richness of feedback - on opinion change and subsequent accuracy of judgmental forecasts. We found that panelists who had low confidence in their judgmental forecast and/or who were in a minority were more likely to change their opinion than those who were more confident and/or in a majority. The addition of rationales, or reasons, to the numeric feedback had little impact upon panelists' final forecasts, despite the quality of panelists' rationales being significantly positively correlated with accurate forecasts and thus of potential use to aid forecast improvement over Delphi rounds. Rather, the effect of rationales was similar to that of confidence: to pull panelists towards the majority opinion regardless of its correctness. We conclude that majority opinion is the strongest influence on panelists' opinion change in both the 'standard' Delphi, and Delphi-with-reasons. We make some suggestions for improved variants of the Delphi-with-reasons technique that should help reduce majority influence and thereby permit reasoned arguments to exert their proper pull on opinion change, resulting in forecast accuracy improvements over Delphi rounds. © 2011.
Deliberative discourse and reasoning from generic argument structures
- Authors: Yearwood, John , Stranieri, Andrew
- Date: 2009
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: AI and Society Vol. 23, no. 3 (2009), p. 353-377
- Full Text: false
- Reviewed:
- Description: In this article a dialectical model for practical reasoning within a community, based on the Generic/Actual Argument Model (GAAM) is advanced and its application to deliberative dialogue discussed. The GAAM, offers a dynamic template for structuring knowledge within a domain of discourse that is connected to and regulated by a community. The paper demonstrates how the community accepted generic argument structure acts to normatively influence both admissible reasoning and the progression of dialectical reasoning between participants. It is further demonstrated that these types of deliberation dialogues supported by the GAAM comply with criteria for normative principles for deliberation, specifically, Alexy's rules for discourse ethics and Hitchcock's Principles of Rational Mutual Inquiry. The connection of reasoning to the community in a documented and transparent structure assists in providing best justified reasons, principles of deliberation and ethical discourse which are important advantages for reasoning communities. © Springer-Verlag London Limited 2006.
Group structured reasoning for coalescing group decisions
- Authors: Yearwood, John , Stranieri, Andrew
- Date: 2009
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Group Decision and Negotiation Vol. , no. (2009), p. 1-29
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: In this paper we present the notion of structured reasoning through a model, called the Generic/Actual Argument Model (GAAM). The model which has been used as a computational representation for machine modelling of reasoning and for hybrid combinations of human and machine reasoning can be used as a coalescent framework for decision making. Whilst the notion of structuring reasoning is not new, structured reasoning is advanced as a technique where group consensus on reasoning structures at various levels can be used to facilitate the comprehension of complex reasoning particularly where there are multiple perspectives. For an issue, the approach provides a scaffolding structure for cognitive co-operation and a normative reasoning structure against which group participants can identify points of difference and points in common as well as the nature of the differences and similarities. Intra-group transparency characterized by the ability to recognise points in common and understand the nature of differences is important to the process of coalescing group decisions that carry maximum group support. © 2009 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
A study of the use of structured reasoning frameworks for improving students' reasoning quality
- Authors: Yearwood, John , Stranieri, Andrew
- Date: 2008
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Learning and Teaching: an international journal in classroom pedagogy Vol. 1, no. 1 (2008), p. 71-90
- Full Text: false
- Reviewed:
- Description: C1
- Description: 2003006498
AWSum - Data mining for insight
- Authors: Quinn, Anthony , Stranieri, Andrew , Yearwood, John , Hafen, Gaudenz
- Date: 2008
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) Vol. 5139 LNAI, no. (8 October 2008 through 10 October 2008 2008), p. 524-531
- Full Text: false
- Reviewed:
- Description: Many classifiers achieve high levels of accuracy but have limited use in real world problems because they provide little insight into data sets, are difficult to interpret and require expertise to use. In areas such as health informatics not only do analysts require accurate classifications but they also want some insight into the influences on the classification. This can then be used to direct research and formulate interventions. This research investigates the practical applications of Automated Weighted Sum, (AWSum), a classifier that gives accuracy comparable to other techniques whist providing insight into the data. AWSum achieves this by calculating a weight for each feature value that represents its influence on the class value. The merits of AWSum in classification and insight are tested on a Cystic Fibrosis dataset with positive results. © 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
- Description: 2003006692
AWSum -Combining classification with knowledge acquisition
- Authors: Quinn, Anthony , Stranieri, Andrew , Yearwood, John , Hafen, Gaudenz , Jelinek, Herbert
- Date: 2008
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: International Journal of Software and Informatics Vol. 2, no. 2 (2008), p. 199-214
- Full Text: false
- Reviewed:
- Description: Many classifiers achieve high levels of accuracy but have limited applicability in real world situations because they do not lead to a greater understanding or insight into the way features influence the classification. In areas such as health informatics a classifier that clearly identifies the influences on classification can be used to direct research and formulate interventions. This research investigates the practical aplications of Automated Weighted Sum, (AWSum), a classifier that provides accuracy comparable to other techniques whist providing insight into the data. This is achieved by calculating a weight for each feature value that represents its influence on the class value. The merits of this approach in classification and insight are evaluated on a Cystic Fibrosis and diabetes datasets with positive results.
Enhancing learning outcomes with an interactive knowledge-based learning environment providing narrative feedback
- Authors: Stranieri, Andrew , Yearwood, John
- Date: 2008
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Interactive Learning Environments Vol. 16, no. 3 (2008), p. 265-281
- Full Text: false
- Reviewed:
- Description: This paper describes a narrative-based interactive learning environment which aims to elucidate reasoning using interactive scenarios that may be used in training novices in decision-making. Its design is based on an approach to generating narrative from knowledge that has been modelled in specific decision/reasoning domains. The approach uses a narrative model that is guided partially by inference and contextual information contained in the particular knowledge representation used, the generic/actual argument model of structured reasoning. The approach is described with examples in the area of critical care nursing training. A study of the effectiveness of this approach on learning outcomes was conducted with final year nursing students and provides evidence of improved learning outcomes.
- Description: C1
Narrative-based interactive learning environments from modelling reasoning
- Authors: Yearwood, John , Stranieri, Andrew
- Date: 2007
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Educational Technology and Society Vol. 10, no. 3 (2007), p. 192-208
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Narrative and story telling has a long history of use in structuring, organising and communicating human experience. This paper describes a narrative based interactive intelligent learning environment which aims to elucidate practical reasoning using interactive emergent narratives that can be used in training novices in decision making. Its design is based on an approach to generating narrative from knowledge that has been modelled in specific decision/reasoning domains. The approach uses a narrative model that is guided partially by inference and contextual information contained in the particular knowledge representation used, the Generic/Actual argument model of structured reasoning. The approach is described with examples in the area of critical care nursing training and positive learning outcomes are reported. © International Forum of Educational Technology & Society (IFETS).
- Description: C1
- Description: 2003002522
The generic/actual argument model of practical reasoning
- Authors: Yearwood, John , Stranieri, Andrew
- Date: 2006
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Decision Support Systems Vol. 41, no. 2 (2006), p. 358-379
- Full Text: false
- Reviewed:
- Description: In this paper, we present a model of reasoning called the generic/actual argument model (GAAM). Reasoning within a discursive community can be represented with this model so that participant claims can be accommodated without recourse to combative metaphors such as attack or defeat. The model facilitates the comprehension of complex reasoning for humans as well as being a computational representation for machine modelling of reasoning. As such, the model naturally integrates machine inferences with human. The model has been the basis for the development of practical systems to support reasoning and deliberation in areas of law and organizational decision making. Here, we present a formal description of the model and identify some of its characteristics. © 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
- Description: C1
- Description: 2003001594
Structured reasoning to support deliberative dialogue
- Authors: Macfadyen, Alyx , Stranieri, Andrew , Yearwood, John
- Date: 2005
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 3681: Knowledge-Based Intelligent Information and Engineering Systems, 9th International Conference, KES 2005, Melbourne, Australia, September 2005, Proceedings, Part 1 Vol. 1, no. (2005), p. 283-289
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Deliberative dialogue is a form of dialogue that involves participants advancing claims and, without power plays or posturing, deliberating on the claims of others until a consensus decision is reached. This paper describes a deliberative support system to facilitate and encourage participants to engage in a discussion deliberatively. A knowledge representation framework is deployed to generate a strong domain model of reasoning structure. The structure, coupled with a deliberative dialogue protocol results in a web based system that regulates a discussion to avoid combative, non-deliberative exchanges. The system has been designed for online dispute resolution between husband and wife in divorce proceedings involving property.
- Description: C1
- Description: 2003001381
An argumentation shell for supporting the development and drafting of legal arguments
- Authors: Yearwood, John , Stranieri, Andrew
- Date: 2002
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Information and Communication Technology Law Vol. 11, no. 1 (2002), p. 75-86
- Full Text: false
- Reviewed:
- Description: This article describes an argumentation shell to support the formulation, representation and drafting of legal arguments. The shell can be used to capture generic arguments in many legal domains as well as to assist decision-makers in constructing their own actual arguments . The shell demonstrates that knowledge represented using the generic/actual argument model (GAAM) (a variant of Toulmin's argument structure) can be used to: (a) support the development of complex arguments, (b) add context and increase specificity for the retrieval of relevant documents, (c) incorporate background knowledge, (d) assist in the drafting of documents that represent arguments made, and (e) provide a structure for complex inferences requiring a range of mechanisms. The shell can be used to support decision making in a range of legal domains, including discretionary domains.
- Description: C1
- Description: 2003000141
Discovering interesting association rules from legal databases
- Authors: Ivkovic, Sasha , Yearwood, John , Stranieri, Andrew
- Date: 2002
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Information & Communication Technology Law Vol. 11, no. 1 (2002), p. 35-47
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: The Knowledge Discovery from Databases (KDD) technique called 'association rules' is applied to a large data set representing applicants for government-funded legal aid. Results indicate that KDD can be an invaluable tool for legal analysts. Association rules discovered identify associations between variables that are present in the data set though are not necessarily causal. Interesting rules can prompt analysts to formulate hypotheses for further investigation. The identification of interesting rules is typically performed using an objective measure of 'interesting' although this measure is often not sufficiently accurate to eliminate all uninteresting rules. In this article, a subjective measure of interestingness is adopted in conjunction with the objective measures. This leads to the ability to focus more accurately on those rules that surprise the analyst and are therefore more likely to be interesting. In general, KDD techniques have not been applied to law despite possible benefits because data is often stored in narrative form rather than in structured databases. However, the impending introduction of data warehouses that collect data from a number of organizations across a legal system presents invaluable opportunities for analysts using KDD.
- Description: C1
- Description: 2003000037
Argumentation structures that integrate dialectical and non-dialectical reasoning
- Authors: Stranieri, Andrew , Zeleznikow, John , Yearwood, John
- Date: 2001
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Knowledge Engineering Review Vol. 16, no. 4 (Dec 2001), p. 331-348
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Argumentation concepts have been applied to numerous knowledge engineering endeavours in recent years. For example, a variety of logics have been developed to represent argumentation in the context of a dialectical situation such as a dialogue. In contrast to the dialectical approach, argumentation has also been used to structure knowledge. This can be seen as a non-dialectical approach. The Toulmin argument structure has often been used to structure knowledge non-dialectically yet most studies that apply the Toulmin structure do not use the original structure but vary one or more components. Variations to the Toulmin structure can be understood as different ways to integrate a dialectical perspective with a non-dialectical one. Drawing the dialectical/non-dialectical distinction enables the specification of a framework called the generic actual argument model that is expressly non-dialectical. The framework enables the development of knowledge-based systems that integrate a variety of inference procedures, combine information retrieval with reasoning and facilitate automated document drafting. Furthermore, the non-dialectical framework provides the foundation for simple dialectical models. Systems based on our approach have been developed in family law, refugee law, determining eligibility for government legal aid, copyright law and e-tourism.
- Description: C1
- Description: 2003002516