Annotation is a central practice in many professions: teachers annotate copies of students professors’ exchange annotated documents during their work engineer co-builds engines by annotating sketches of plans to make them evolve, doctors’ comment on the patient records.etc. Indeed, during our reading, we are all accustomed to writing our comments in the margin of the document, highlighting or circling part of the text to enrich and add value to information (Khalil Chehab, Kalboussi, & Kacem, 2019 Anis Kalboussi, Mazhoud, Omheni, & Kacem, 2014 Anis Kalboussi, Omheni, Mazhoud, & Kacem, 2015a). The paper annotation practice is very common. Finally, these unified and integrated classifications criteria are used to organize and observe the limitation of 50 medical annotation tool systems. The second classification is an internal vision that gives us an idea about the functionalities offered by these systems. The first classification provides an external vision based on five generic criteria. Therefore, the authors propose two taxonomies to distinguish annotation tools developed by industry and academia over the last two decades. The exponential increase in the number of medical annotation systems made the choice of a system by a PHC difficult, in a well-defined context (biology, radiology) and according to his/her needs to the functionalities offered by these tools. Similarly, this cycle represents the life cycle of annotations in the patient record. These annotations are generated within a healthcare cycle. AbstractThe annotation practice is an almost daily activity used by healthcare professionals (PHC) to analyze patients' records, collaborate, share knowledge, and communicate.
0 kommentar(er)
