Clinical Decision Support Clustering for Confidence-Based Criteria Detection

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Healthcare professionals struggle to interpret complex clinical decision support (CDS) algorithm outputs reliably, leading to increased workload and reduced confidence, as the algorithms generate false positives and negatives, complicating decision-making.

Innovation Solution

A method and system that clusters CDS algorithm outputs into multi-dimensional parameter space based on accuracy, calculating a confidence score for each cluster to indicate reliability, allowing healthcare professionals to make informed decisions.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If complex and sophisticated CDS services are offered, then the accuracy and comprehensiveness of clinical decision support is improved, but the interpretability and confidence of healthcare professionals in the output is reduced

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveaccuracy of CDS outputVSAvoidinterpretability by healthcare professionals
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the complex CDS output into distinct clusters representing different clinical scenarios or patient populations. By dividing the continuous output space into discrete, interpretable groups, the system maintains high accuracy while improving interpretability. Each cluster can be associated with specific patient characteristics or clinical contexts, making the output more understandable to healthcare professionals.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies visual encoding (color changes) to represent different confidence levels or cluster assignments in the CDS output. This transforms abstract algorithmic results into visually intuitive information that healthcare professionals can quickly interpret. Different colors indicate different levels of confidence or types of recommendations, enhancing ease of interpretation without sacrificing accuracy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #32Color changes

2Reliability

If complex CDS algorithms are used, then the quality of clinical decision support is improved, but the workload of healthcare professionals for interpretation is increased

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvequality of CDS outputVSAvoidworkload of healthcare professionals
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs automated clustering and confidence score calculation without requiring healthcare professionals to manually interpret or validate each CDS output. The algorithm self-organizes the output into meaningful clusters and assigns confidence levels automatically, reducing the interpretive workload while maintaining high quality output through the sophisticated clustering methodology.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary organization and interpretation of CDS output by clustering similar cases together before presenting to healthcare professionals. This pre-processing step groups related recommendations and identifies patterns, so that clinicians receive pre-organized information that requires less cognitive effort to interpret, thereby reducing workload while preserving output quality.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

3Ease of operation

If simple CDS algorithms are used, then the interpretability by healthcare professionals is improved, but the accuracy and reliability of the output is reduced

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveinterpretability by healthcare professionalsVSAvoidaccuracy of CDS output
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent adds a new dimension to the CDS output by introducing confidence scores and cluster assignments. This transforms simple algorithmic outputs into multi-dimensional information that includes both the clinical recommendation and its reliability metric. Healthcare professionals gain interpretability through the additional dimensional information without sacrificing the underlying accuracy of the clinical recommendations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

Solution Approach 2:

The clustering algorithm acts as an intermediary between the simple CDS algorithm and the healthcare professional. It takes the raw output, organizes it into meaningful clusters, and adds interpretive layers such as confidence scores and cluster characteristics. This intermediary processing enhances interpretability while preserving the accuracy of the original clinical recommendations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

4Reliability

If confidence scores are added to CDS output, then the reliability and actionable information quality is improved, but the system complexity is increased

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveactionable information qualityVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent merges the confidence scoring function with the existing CDS algorithm output generation. Rather than adding a completely separate complex system, the clustering and confidence calculation are integrated into the workflow, combining multiple functions (clustering, confidence assessment, output generation) into a unified system that manages complexity while delivering reliable actionable information.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Data Source

PatentEP3568864B1Method and system for automated inclusion or exclusion criteria detection
Publication Date: 2025.07.02 KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS NV
  • EP3568864B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3568864B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3568864B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

A method (100) for training a scoring system (600) comprising the steps of: (i) providing (110) a scoring system comprising a scoring module (606); (ii) receiving (120) a training dataset comprising a plurality of patient data and treatment outcomes; (iii) analyzing (130), using a clinical decision support algorithm, the training dataset to generate a plurality of clinical decision support recommendations; (iv) clustering (140), using the scoring module, the plurality of clinical decision support recommendations into a plurality of clusters; and (v) identifying (160), using the scoring module, one or more features of at least one of the plurality of clusters, and generating, based on the identified one or more features, one or more inclusion criteria for the at least one of the plurality of clusters.