Assumption-based argumentation with preferences and goals for patient-centric reasoning with interacting clinical guidelines

  title={Assumption-based argumentation with preferences and goals for patient-centric reasoning with interacting clinical guidelines},
  author={K. Cyras and Tiago Oliveira and Amin Karamlou and F. Toni},
  journal={Argument Comput.},
A paramount, yet unresolved issue in personalised medicine is that of automated reasoning with clinical guidelines in multimorbidity settings. This entails enabling machines to use computerised generic clinical guideline recommendations and patient-specific information to yield patient-tailored recommendations where interactions arising due to multimorbidities are resolved. This problem is further complicated by patient management desiderata, in particular the need to account for patient… Expand
Declarative Algorithms and Complexity Results for Assumption-Based Argumentation
The study of computational models for argumentation is a vibrant area of artificial intelligence and, in particular, knowledge representation and reasoning research. Arguments most often have anExpand
Enforcing Sets of Formulas in Structured Argumentation
Enforcement, adjusting an argumentation framework such that a certain set of arguments becomes acceptable, is an important research topic within the study of dynamic argumentation, but one that hasExpand


Resolving Conflicts in Clinical Guidelines using Argumentation
This work advances a structured argumentation formalism for reasoning with conflicting clinical guidelines, patient-specific information and preferences and relies on the state-of-the-art Transition-based Medical Recommendation model for representing guideline recommendations and augment it with context given by the patient's conditions, goals, as well as preferences over recommendations and goals. Expand
Towards an Argumentation System for Supporting Patients in Self-Managing Their Chronic Conditions
The architecture of CONSULT is outlined, illustrating how facts are gathered about the patient and various preferences of the patients and the clinician(s) involved, and Logical arguments are constructed from these facts and guidelines to resolve inconsistencies concerning various treatment options and patient/clinician preferences. Expand
Argumentation for Reasoning with Conflicting Clinical Guidelines and Preferences
We propose to use two structured argumentation formalisms, assumption-driven ABA+ and goal-driven ASPIC-G, to enable automated patient-centric medical reasoning with interacting clinical guidelineExpand
Argumentation logic for the flexible enactment of goal-based medical guidelines
A prototype clinical workflow system that allows the specification and enactment of medical guidelines in terms of clinical goals to be achieved, maintained or avoided depending on the patient's disease and treatment evolution is designed. Expand
Context-based and Explainable Decision Making with Argumentation
A graphical representation for modelling decision problems involving varying contexts, Decision Graphs with Context (DGC), and a reasoning mechanism for making context-based decisions which relies on the Assumption-based Argumentation formalism are proposed. Expand
Argumentation for Knowledge Representation, Conflict Resolution, Defeasible Inference and Its Integration with Machine Learning
  • Luca Longo
  • Computer Science
  • Machine Learning for Health Informatics
  • 2016
The first aim of this chapter is to provide readers informally with the basic notions of defeasible and non-monotonic reasoning, and to describe a selection of argument-based applications in the medical and health-care sectors, informed by the multi-layer schema. Expand
Assumption-Based Argumentation Equipped with Preferences
An assumption-based argumentation framework equipped with preferences (p_ABA) is presented, which increases the expressive power of ABA by incorporating preferences between sentences into the framework. Expand
ArgMed: A Support System for Medical Decision Making Based on the Analysis of Clinical Discussions
The design, development and experimentation of ArgMed, an interactive system aimed at supporting decision making processes that occur during clinical discussions, are presented and the approach adopted for ArgMed design, the system architecture and operation, and the knowledge-based engine that implements decision support are described. Expand
Explanation for Case-Based Reasoning via Abstract Argumentation
Property of a recently proposed method for CBR, based on instantiated Abstract Argumentation and referred to as AA-CBR, for problems where cases are represented by abstract factors and (positive or negative) outcomes, and an outcome for a new case needs to be established is studied. Expand
Temporal Conformance Analysis and Explanation of Clinical Guidelines Execution: An Answer Set Programming Approach
An approach for analyzing execution traces in Answer Set Programming with respect to a guideline and BMK is proposed, pointing out discrepancies and providing explanations regarding how the applications of the CG and the BMK have interacted, especially in case strictly adhering to both is not possible. Expand