Healthc Inform Res.  2022 Oct;28(4):332-342. 10.4258/hir.2022.28.4.332.

Ontology for Symptomatic Treatment of Multiple Sclerosis

• Esfahani MZ
• Ahmadi M
• Adibi I

• KMID: 2535808
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4258/hir.2022.28.4.332

Abstract

Objectives
Symptomatic treatment is an essential component in the overall treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS). However, knowledge in this regard is confusing and scattered. Physicians also have challenges in choosing symptomatic treatment based on the patient’s condition. To share, update, and reuse this knowledge, the aim of this study was to provide an ontology for MS symptomatic treatment.
Methods
The Symptomatic Treatment of Multiple Sclerosis Ontology (STMSO) was developed according to Ontology Development 101 and a guideline for developing good ontologies in the biomedical domain. We obtained knowledge and rules through a systematic review and entered this knowledge in the form of classes and subclasses in the ontology. We then mapped the ontology using the Basic Formal Ontology (BFO) and Ontology for General Medical Sciences (OGMS) as reference ontologies. The ontology was built using Protégé Editor in the Web Ontology Language format. Finally, an evaluation was done by experts using criterion-based approaches in terms of accuracy, clarity, consistency, and completeness.
Results
The knowledge extraction phase identified 110 articles related to the ontology in the form of 626 classes, 40 object properties, and 139 rules. Five general classes included “patient,” “symptoms,” “pharmacological treatment,” “treatment plan,” and “measurement index.” The evaluation in terms of standards for biomedical ontology showed that STMSO was accurate, clear, consistent, and complete.
Conclusions
STMSO is the first comprehensive semantic representation of the symptomatic treatment of MS and provides a major step toward the development of intelligent clinical decision support systems for symptomatic MS treatment.

Keyword

Ontology; Multiple Sclerosis; Clinical Decision Support System; Symptomatic Treatment; Knowledge Reuse

Figure

• 

  Figure 1 Symptomatic Treatment of Multiple Sclerosis Ontology (STMSO) methodology overview. BFO: Basic Formal Ontology, OGMS: Ontology for General Medical Science.

• 

  Figure 2 Screenshot of ontology classes and object properties implemented using Protégé.

• 

  Figure 3 Flowchart of the publication search process.

• 

  Figure 4 Portion of the Symptomatic Treatment of Multiple Sclerosis Ontology (STMSO) in relation to top-level ontologies. Each arrow sign represents an “is-a” relation. BFO: Basic Formal Ontology, OGMS: Ontology for General Medical Science.

Reference

References

1. Daltrozzo T, Hapfelmeier A, Donnachie E, Schneider A, Hemmer B. A systematic assessment of prevalence, incidence and regional distribution of multiple sclerosis in Bavaria from 2006 to 2015. Front Neurol. 2018; 9:871. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2018.00871 .

2. Browne P, Chandraratna D, Angood C, Tremlett H, Baker C, Taylor BV, et al. Atlas of Multiple Sclerosis 2013: a growing global problem with widespread inequity. Neurology. 2014; 83(11):1022–4. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0000000000000768 .

3. Rommer PS, Eichstadt K, Ellenberger D, Flachenecker P, Friede T, Haas J, et al. Symptomatology and symptomatic treatment in multiple sclerosis: results from a nationwide MS registry. Mult Scler. 2019; 25(12):1641–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458518799580 .

4. Willems LM, Vriezekolk JE, Schouffoer AA, Poole JL, Stamm TA, Bostrom C, et al. Effectiveness of non-pharmacologic interventions in systemic sclerosis: a systematic review. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2015; 67(10):1426–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jns.2017.08.012 .

5. Miller P, Soundy A. The pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions for the management of fatigue related multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Sci. 2017; 381:41–54.

6. Ng P, Murray S, Hayes SM. Clinical decision-making in multiple sclerosis: challenges reported internationally with emerging treatment complexity. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2015; 4(4):320–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msard.2015.05.008 .

7. de Sa JC, Airas L, Bartholome E, Grigoriadis N, Mattle H, Oreja-Guevara C, et al. Symptomatic therapy in multiple sclerosis: a review for a multimodal approach in clinical practice. Ther Adv Neurol Disord. 2011; 4(3):139–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/1756285611403646 .

8. Linker RA, Chan A. Navigating choice in multiple sclerosis management. Neurol Res Pract. 2019; 1:5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42466-019-0005-5 .

9. Maedche A, Staab S. Ontology learning for the semantic web. IEEE Intell Syst. 2001; 16(2):72–9. https://doi.org/10.1109/5254.920602 .

10. Hadzic M, Chen M, Dillon TS. Towards the mental health ontology. In : Proceedings of 2008 IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedicine; 2008 Nov 3–5; Philadelphia, PA. p. 284–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/BIBM.2008.59 .

11. Dissanayake PI, Colicchio TK, Cimino JJ. Using clinical reasoning ontologies to make smarter clinical decision support systems: a systematic review and data synthesis. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2020; 27(1):159–74. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocz169 .

12. Shen Y, Colloc J, Jacquet-Andrieu A, Guo Z, Liu Y. Constructing ontology-based cancer treatment decision support system with case-based reasoning. Qiu M, editor. Smart computing and communication. Cham, Switzerland: Springer;2017. p. 278–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73830-7_28 .

13. El-Sappagh S, Kwak D, Ali F, Kwak KS. DMTO: a realistic ontology for standard diabetes mellitus treatment. J Biomed Semantics. 2018; 9(1):8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13326-018-0176-y .

14. Malhotra A, Gundel M, Rajput AM, Mevissen HT, Saiz A, Pastor X, et al. Knowledge retrieval from PubMed abstracts and electronic medical records with the Multiple Sclerosis Ontology. PLoS One. 2015; 10(2):e0116718. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116718 .

15. Jensen M, Cox AP, Chaudhry N, Ng M, Sule D, Duncan W, et al. The neurological disease ontology. J Biomed Semantics. 2013; 4(1):42. https://doi.org/10.1186/2041-1480-4-42 .

16. Jensen M, Cox AP, Ray P, Teter BE, Weinstock-Guttman B, Ruttenberg A, et al. An ontological representation and analysis of patient-reported and clinical outcomes for multiple sclerosis. In : Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Biomedical Ontology (ICBO); 2014 Oct 8–9; Houston, TX. p. 52–5.

17. Noy NF, McGuinness DL. Ontology development 101 a guide to creating your first ontology. Stanford (CA): Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Stanford University;2001.

18. Schulz S, Grewe N, Rohl J, Schober D, Boeker M, Jansen L. Guideline on developing good ontologies in the biomedical domain with description logics [Internet]. Rostock, Germany: Universitat Rostock;2012. [cited at 2022 Oct 10]. Available from: https://www.iph.uni-rostock.de/forschung/homepage-goodod/guideline/ .

19. US Food and Drug Administration. Medication Guides [Internet]. Silver Spring (MD): Food and Drug Administration;c2022. [cited at 2022 Oct 10]. Available from: https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safety-and-availability/medication-guides .

20. Motik B, Patel-Schneider PF, Parsia B, Bock C, Fokoue A, Haase P, et al. OWL 2 web ontology language: structural specification and functional-style syntax. W3C Recommendation. 2009; 27(65):159.

21. Elmhadhbi L, Karray MH, Archimede B. Toward the use of upper-level ontologies for semantically interoperable systems: an emergency management use case. Popplewell K, Thoben KD, Knothe T, Poler R, editors. Enterprise interoperability VIII. Cham, Switzerland: Springer;2019. p. 131–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13693-2_11 .

22. Arp R, Smith B, Spear AD. Building ontologies with basic formal ontology. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press;2015.

23. El-Sappagh S, Ali F. DDO: a diabetes mellitus diagnosis ontology. Applied Informatics. 2016; 3:5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40535-016-0021-2 .

24. Obrst L, Ceusters W, Mani I, Ray S, Smith B. The evaluation of ontologies. Baker CJ, Cheung KH, editors. Semantic web. Boston (MA): Springer;2007. p. 139–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-48438-9_8 .

25. Raad J, Cruz C. A survey on ontology evaluation methods. In : Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Ontology Development, part of the 7th International Joint Conference on Knowledge Discovery, Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management (IC3K); 2015 Nov 12–14; Lisbon, Portugal. p. 179–86.

26. Amith M, He Z, Bian J, Lossio-Ventura JA, Tao C. Assessing the practice of biomedical ontology evaluation: gaps and opportunities. J Biomed Inform. 2018; 80:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2018.02.010 .

27. Sirin E, Parsia B, Grau BC, Kalyanpur A, Katz Y. Pellet: a practical OWL-DL reasoner. J Web Semant. 2007; 5(2):51–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.websem.2007.03.004 .

28. Pak J, Zhou L. A framework for ontology evaluation. Sharman R, Rao HR, Raghu TS, editors. Workshop on e-business. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer;2009. p. 10–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-17449-0_2 .

29. Dostal M, Jezek K. Automatic keyphrase extraction based on NLP and statistical method. [place unknown]: DATESO2011;2011. [cited at Oct 10]. Available from: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-706/poster13.pdf .

30. Zhang Z, Yu P, Chang HC, Lau SK, Tao C, Wang N, et al. Developing an ontology for representing the domain knowledge specific to non-pharmacological treatment for agitation in dementia. Alzheimers Dement (N Y). 2020; 6(1):e12061. https://doi.org/10.1002/trc2.12061 .