Background and Aim: This article will discuss Semantic Web standards and ontologies in two areas: (1) the research and (2) healthcare. Semantic Web standards are important in the medical sciences since much of the medical research that is available needs an avenue to be shared across disparate computer systems.
Methods: This review article was performed based on a literature review and internet search through scientific databases such as PubMed, Scopus, Web of science and Google Scholar.
Conclusion: Ontologies can provide a basis for the searching of context-based medical research information so that it can be integrated and used as a foundation for future research. The healthcare industry will be examined specifically in its use of electronic health records (EHR), which need Semantic Web standards to be communicated across different EHR systems. The increased use of EHRs across healthcare organizations will also require ontologies to support context-sensitive searching of information, as well as creating context-based rules for appointments, procedures, and tests so that the quality of healthcare is improved. Literature in these areas has been combined in this article to provide a general view of how Semantic Web standards and ontologies are used, and to give examples of applications in the areas of healthcare and the medical sciences.
Sure Y, Studer R. Semantic web technologies for digital libraries. Library Management. 2005; 26 (4/5): 190-5.
Sadeh T, Walker J. Library portals: Toward the semantic web. New Library World. 2003; 104(1/2): 11-9.
Martinez-Costa C, Menarguez-Tortosa M, Maldonado JA, Fernandez-Breis JT. Semantic web technologies for managing EHR-related clinical knowledge. In: Wu G (Ed.). Semantic web. IntechOpen, 2010.
Ogbuji C. A role for semantic web technologies in patient record data collection. In: Wood D. (Ed.). Linking enterprise data. Springer US. 2010.
Cullen R. Health information on the Internet: A study of providers, quality and users. Westport: Praeger; London. 2006.
Tan J. Medical informatics: Concepts, methodology, tools and applications. Medical Information Science Reference; NewYork. 2009.
Hong-Gee K. Links on the semantic web. Seoul national university. [Internet]. 2008. [cited: 2018 Dec 12]. Available from: www.eurosouthkorea-ict.org
Berka P, Rauch J, Abdelkhader Zighed D. Data mining and medical knowledge management. Hershy; NewYork. 2009.
Popescu M, Xu D. Data mining in bioinformatic using ontologies. Artech House; Boston. 2009.
Alasoud A, Haarslev V, Shiri N. A hybrid approach for ontology integration. Proceedings of the 31st VLDB Conference. Trondheim: Norway. 2005.
Burke M. The semantic web and the digital Library. Aslib Proceedings. 2009; 61(3): 316-22.
Hendler J. Agents and the Semantic Web. Intelligent Systems. 2001; 16(2): 30-7.
McGuinness D, Fikes R, Hendler J, Stein L. DAML+OIL: An ontology language for the semantic web. Intelligent Systems. 2002; 17(5): 72-80.
Wager K, Lee F, Glaser J. Managing healthcare information system. Jossey-Bass; San Fransisco. 2005.
Ermolayev V, Keberle N, Plaksin S, Kononenko O, Terziyan VY. Towards a framework for agent-enabled semantic web service composition. Int. J. Web Service Res. 2004; 1(3): 63-87.
Van Diggelen J, Beun RJ, Dignum F, Van Eijk R, Meyer JJ. Ontology negotiation in heterogeneous multi-agent systems: The anemone system. Applied Ontology. 2007; 11 (2): 267–303.
Bui A, Taira R. Medical imaging informatics. Springer; NewYork. 2010.
Wickramasinghe N, Gupta JND, Sharma SK. Creating knowledge-based health care organization. Hershy; London. 2005.
McWay DC. Today’s health information management. 2nd ed. Delmar Cengage Learning; USA. 2008.
Burners-Lee T, Handler J, Lassila O. The semantic web. Scientific American. 2001; 284: 29-37.
Chen H, Fuller SS, Friedman C, Hersh W. Medical Iiformatics: Knowledge management and data mining in biomedicine. Springer; London. 2005.