The DOI matches its Crossref record; 17 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
GEM: A Proposal for a More Comprehensive Guideline Document Model Using XML
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To develop a guideline document model that includes a sufficiently broad set of concepts to be useful throughout the guideline life cycle. DESIGN: Current guideline document models are limited in that they reflect the specific orientation of the stakeholder who created them; thus, developers and disseminators often provide few constructs for conceptualizing recommendations, while implementers de-emphasize concepts related to establishing guideline validity. The authors developed the Guideline Elements Model (GEM) using XML to better represent the heterogeneous knowledge contained in practice guidelines. Core constructs were derived from the Institute of Medicine's Guideline Appraisal Instrument, the National Guideline Clearinghouse, and the augmented decision table guideline representation. These were supplemented by additional concepts from a literature review. RESULTS: The GEM hierarchy includes more than 100 elements. Major concepts relate to a guideline's identity, developer, purpose, intended audience, method of development, target population, knowledge components, testing, and review plan. Knowledge components in guideline documents include recommendations (which in turn comprise conditionals and imperatives), definitions, and algorithms. CONCLUSION: GEM is more comprehensive than existing models and is expressively adequate to represent the heterogeneous information contained in guidelines. Use of XML contributes to a flexible, comprehensible, shareable, and reusable knowledge representation that is both readable by human beings and processible by computers.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Guidelines for Clinical Practice: From Development to Use
(1992) · National Academies Press eBooks · doi:10.17226/1863 · Cited by 915
Shaneyfelt, T. M., Mayo-Smith, M. F., & Rothwangl, J. (1999) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.281.20.1900 · Cited by 844
Maternal mortality surveillance, United States, 1980-1985.
Koonin, L. M., Atrash, H. K., Rochat, R. W., & Smith, J. C. (1988) · PubMed · Cited by 509
Immunization Practices Advisory Committee (1991) · PsycEXTRA Dataset · doi:10.1037/e546382006-001 · Cited by 398
The GuideLine Interchange Format: A Model for Representing Guidelines
Ohno-Machado, L., Gennari, J. H., Murphy, S. N., Jain, N. L., Tu, S. W., Oliver, D. E., Pattison-Gordon, E., Greenes, R. A., Shortliffe, E. H., & Barnett, G. O. (1998) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1136/jamia.1998.0050357 · Cited by 378
Practice Guidelines: A New Reality in Medicine: I. Recent Developments
Woolf, S. H. (1990) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.1990.00390200025005 · Cited by 288
Computerizing Guidelines to Improve Care and Patient Outcomes: The Example of Heart Failure
Tierney, W. M., Overhage, J. M., Takesue, B. Y., Harris, L. E., Murray, M. D., Vargo, D. L., & McDonald, C. J. (1995) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1136/jamia.1995.96073834 · Cited by 214
Otitis Media with Effusion in Young Children
Se, S., Berg, A., Berman, S., Carney, C. J., Cooley, Culpepper, L., Eavey, R. D., Feagans, L., Finitzo, T., & Friedman, E. (1994) · Cited by 166
More Informative Abstracts of Articles Describing Clinical Practice Guidelines
Hayward, R. S., Wilson, M. C., Tunis, S., Bass, E. B., Rubin, H. R., & Haynes, R. B. (1993) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-118-9-199305010-00012 · Cited by 126
Online Practice Guidelines: Issues, Obstacles, and Future Prospects
Zielstorff, R. D. (1998) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1136/jamia.1998.0050227 · Cited by 125
Cited by
Moher, D., Schulz, K. F., & Altman, D. G. (2001) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-1-2 · Cited by 2,755
Clinical practice guideline: Adult sinusitis
Rosenfeld, R. M., Andes, D., Neil, B., Cheung, D., Eisenberg, S., Ganiats, T. G., Gelzer, A., Hamilos, D., Haydon, R. C., Hudgins, P. A., et al. (2007) · Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.otohns.2007.06.726 · Cited by 907
Self-citationShiffman, R. N., Shekelle, P., Overhage, J. M., Slutsky, J., Grimshaw, J., & Deshpande, A. M. (2003) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-139-6-200309160-00013 · Cited by 451
Self-citationRoland, P. S., Rosenfeld, R. M., Brooks, L. J., Friedman, N. R., Jones, J., Kim, T. W., Kuhar, S., Mitchell, R. B., Seidman, M. D., Sheldon, S. H., et al. (2011) · Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery · doi:10.1177/0194599811409837 · Cited by 442
Shiffman, R. N., Michel, G., Essaihi, A., & Thornquist, E. (2004) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m1444 · Cited by 204
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Shiffman, R. N., Karras, B. T., Agrawal, A., Chen, R., Marenco, L., & Nath, S.
- Venue
- Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2000-09-01
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 488-498
- ISSN
- 1067-5027 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-974X
- OpenAlex
- W1580312531
- Cited by
- 277
- References
- 17
- FWCI
- 17.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: GEM: A Proposal for a More Comprehensive Guideline Document Model Using XML. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/jamia.2000.0070488
- The paper
- Shiffman, R. N., Karras, B. T., Agrawal, A., Chen, R., Marenco, L., & Nath, S. (2000). GEM: A Proposal for a More Comprehensive Guideline Document Model Using XML. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. https://doi.org/10.1136/jamia.2000.0070488
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
