Abstract：
Guideline-based clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) need the most recent evidence for reliable performance, making the provision of regularly updated clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) a major issue. Some international guidelines are renewed in short intervals and can be used for checking the status of given national guidelines with regard to the most recent evidence. Considering the volume of medical data and the number of CPGs published, computerized comparison of clinical guidelines can be an effective method. We performed a scoping review to evaluate the methods used for comparing two CPGs. We searched for methods for extracting CPG components and for methods used for comparing CPGs at different levels of abstraction. In each case, computerized and semi-computerized methods were recognized. Expert knowledge has yet a determinant role for assessing the comparisons, this role being more prominent for the extraction of semantic rules and the resolution of inconsistencies.
摘要：
基于指南的临床决策支持系统(CDSS)需要最新的可靠性能证据,使提供定期更新的临床实践指南（CPG）成为主要问题。一些国际准则在短时间内更新，可用于检查有关最新证据的特定国家准则的状况。考虑到医疗数据量和发布的CPG数量，临床指南的计算机化比较可以成为一种有效的方法。我们进行了范围审查，以评估用于比较两个CPG的方法。我们搜索了提取CPG组件的方法以及用于比较不同抽象级别的CPG的方法。在每种情况下，计算机化和半计算机化方法得到认可。专家知识在评估比较方面仍具有决定性作用，这一作用对于语义规则的提取和不一致的解决更为突出。
