4.7 Article

A fuzzy inference- fuzzy analytic hierarchy process-based clinical decision support system for diagnosis of heart diseases

Journal

EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS
Volume 95, Issue -, Pages 261-271

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2017.11.001

Keywords

Expert systems; Fuzzy rules; Heart disease diagnosis; Heart disease prediction

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Many organizations and institutions are implementing accurate and practical tools to accelerate decision making process. In this regard, hospitals and healthcare centers are not exceptions, in particular, because they directly impact the health and well-being of the community. When it comes to disease diagnosis, practitioners may have different opinions, which lead to different decisions and actions. On the other hand, the amount of available information, even in a case of a typical disease is so vast that rapid and accurate decision-making may be difficult. For example, practitioners may prescribe several expensive tests in order to diagnose a heart disease whereas many of those tests might not even be required. Accordingly, a Clinical Decision Support System (CDSS) can be very helpful here. In particular, such a CDSS can be developed as an expert system for those patients who have a high likelihood of developing heart diseases. This study develops an expert system based on Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Fuzzy Inference System in order to evaluate the condition of patients who are being examined for heart diseases. The Fuzzy AHP is used to calculate weights for different criteria that impact developing heart diseases, and the Fuzzy Inference System is used to assess and evaluate the likelihood of developing heart diseases in a patient. The developed system has been implemented in a hospital in Tehran. The outcomes show efficiency and accuracy of the developed approach. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available