Using Case-Based Reasoning in a Learning System: A Prototype of a Pedagogical Nurse Tool for Evidence-Based Diabetic Foot Ulcer Care.
case-based reasoning
diabetic foot ulcers
dissimilarity score
education
evidence
interactive learning system
knowledge level
variables
wound care nurses
Journal
Journal of diabetes science and technology
ISSN: 1932-2968
Titre abrégé: J Diabetes Sci Technol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101306166
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2022
Mar 2022
Historique:
pubmed:
16
2
2021
medline:
23
3
2022
entrez:
15
2
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Currently, evidence-based learning systems to increase knowledge and evidence level of wound care are unavailable to wound care nurses in Denmark, which means that they need to learn about diabetic foot ulcers from experience and peer-to-peer training, or by asking experienced colleagues. Interactive evidence-based learning systems built on case-based reasoning (CBR) have the potential to increase wound care nurses' diabetic foot ulcer knowledge and evidence levels. A prototype of a CBR-interactive, evidence-based algorithm-operated learning system calculates a dissimilarity score (DS) that gives a quantitative measure of similarity between a new case and cases stored in a case base in relation to six variables: necrosis, wound size, granulation, fibrin, dry skin, and age. Based on the DS, cases are selected by matching the six variables with the best predictive power and by weighing the impact of each variable according to its contribution to the prediction. The cases are ranked, and the six cases with the lowest DS are visualized in the system. Conventional education, that is, evidence-based learning material such as books and lectures, may be less motivating and pedagogical than peer-to-peer training, which is, however, often less evidence-based. The CBR interactive learning systems presented in this study may bridge the two approaches. Showing wound care nurses how individual variables affect outcomes may help them achieve greater insights into pathophysiological processes. A prototype of a CBR-interactive, evidence-based learning system that is centered on diabetic foot ulcers and related treatments bridges the gap between traditional evidence-based learning and more motivating and interactive learning approaches.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Currently, evidence-based learning systems to increase knowledge and evidence level of wound care are unavailable to wound care nurses in Denmark, which means that they need to learn about diabetic foot ulcers from experience and peer-to-peer training, or by asking experienced colleagues. Interactive evidence-based learning systems built on case-based reasoning (CBR) have the potential to increase wound care nurses' diabetic foot ulcer knowledge and evidence levels.
METHOD
METHODS
A prototype of a CBR-interactive, evidence-based algorithm-operated learning system calculates a dissimilarity score (DS) that gives a quantitative measure of similarity between a new case and cases stored in a case base in relation to six variables: necrosis, wound size, granulation, fibrin, dry skin, and age. Based on the DS, cases are selected by matching the six variables with the best predictive power and by weighing the impact of each variable according to its contribution to the prediction. The cases are ranked, and the six cases with the lowest DS are visualized in the system.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Conventional education, that is, evidence-based learning material such as books and lectures, may be less motivating and pedagogical than peer-to-peer training, which is, however, often less evidence-based. The CBR interactive learning systems presented in this study may bridge the two approaches. Showing wound care nurses how individual variables affect outcomes may help them achieve greater insights into pathophysiological processes.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
A prototype of a CBR-interactive, evidence-based learning system that is centered on diabetic foot ulcers and related treatments bridges the gap between traditional evidence-based learning and more motivating and interactive learning approaches.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33583205
doi: 10.1177/1932296821991127
pmc: PMC8861795
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
454-459Références
Artif Intell Med. 2011 Feb;51(2):75-9
pubmed: 21397782
Artif Intell Med. 2006 Feb;36(2):121-5
pubmed: 16213128
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Sep 07;(9):CD009111
pubmed: 21901731
J Med Internet Res. 2019 Feb 14;21(2):e12913
pubmed: 30762583
Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2002 Aug;69(2):147-61
pubmed: 12100794
Int J Med Inform. 2000 Sep;58-59:243-56
pubmed: 10978925
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Aug 17;(8):CD006810
pubmed: 23955465
J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2017 Jan;11(1):37-42
pubmed: 26862136
IEEE J Biomed Health Inform. 2015 May;19(3):1087-96
pubmed: 24956470
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Jan 20;(1):CD003556
pubmed: 20091547
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Jan 31;(1):CD002302
pubmed: 23440787
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Jun 25;(6):CD009110
pubmed: 23799857
J Clin Nurs. 2016 Sep;25(17-18):2706-12
pubmed: 26265540
Artif Intell Med. 2011 Sep;53(1):15-23
pubmed: 21757326
J Wound Care. 2013 Oct;22(10):540-2, 544-5
pubmed: 24142076
Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle). 2012 Jun;1(3):133-137
pubmed: 24527293
J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2003 Jan;30(1):25-32
pubmed: 12529591
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Feb 11;2:CD011255
pubmed: 26866804
J Med Syst. 2012 Apr;36(2):407-14
pubmed: 20703710
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Jul;128(1):305-310
pubmed: 21701348
Lancet. 2005 Nov 12;366(9498):1719-24
pubmed: 16291066
J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2021 Sep;15(5):1161-1167
pubmed: 32696655
Pharmacoeconomics. 2000 Sep;18(3):225-38
pubmed: 11147390
JMIR Diabetes. 2018 Jun 21;3(2):e11
pubmed: 30291078
Int Wound J. 2018 Feb;15(1):53-61
pubmed: 29045004
Int J Med Inform. 2001 Dec;64(2-3):355-67
pubmed: 11734397
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Oct 28;(10):CD008548
pubmed: 26509249
Diabetes Care. 2009 Feb;32(2):275-80
pubmed: 19001192
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Sep 04;(9):CD009061
pubmed: 26337865
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Jan 25;(1):CD005082
pubmed: 16437516