Objective: To develop and test an auditing methodology for detecting errors in medical terminologies satisfying systematic inheritance. This methodology is based on various abstraction taxonomies that provide high-level views of a terminology and highlight potentially erroneous concepts. Design: Our auditing methodology is based on dividing concepts of a terminology into smaller, more manageable units. First, we divide the terminology's concepts into areas according to their relationships/roles. Then each multi-rooted area is further divided into partial-areas (p-areas) that are singly-rooted. Each p-area contains a set of structurally and semantically uniform concepts. Two kinds of abstraction networks, called the area taxonomy and p-area taxonomy, are derived. These taxonomies form the basis for the auditing approach. Taxonomies tend to highlight potentially erroneous concepts in areas and p-areas. Human reviewers can focus their auditing efforts on the limited number of problematic concepts following two hypotheses on the probable concentration of errors. Results: A sample of the area taxonomy and p-area taxonomy for the Biological Process (BP) hierarchy of the National Cancer Institute Thesaurus (NCIT) was derived from the application of our methodology to its concepts. These views led to the detection of a number of different kinds of errors that are reported, and to confirmation of the hypotheses on error concentration in this hierarchy. Conclusion: Our auditing methodology based on area and p-area taxonomies is an efficient tool for detecting errors in terminologies satisfying systematic inheritance of roles, and thus facilitates their maintenance. This methodology concentrates a domain expert's manual review on portions of the concepts with a high likelihood of errors.

Objective Standards terminologies may be large and complex, making their quality assurance challenging. Some terminology quality assurance (TQA) methodologies are based on abstraction networks (AbNs), compact terminology summaries. We have tested AbNs and the performance of related TQA methodologies on small terminology hierarchies. However, some standards terminologies, for example, SNOMED, are composed of very large hierarchies. Scaling AbN TQA techniques to such hierarchies poses a significant challenge. We present a scalable subject-based approach for AbN TQA. Methods An innovative technique is presented for scaling TQA by creating a new kind of subject-based AbN called a subtaxonomy for large hierarchies. New hypotheses about concentrations of erroneous concepts within the AbN are introduced to guide scalable TQA. Results We test the TQA methodology for a subject-based subtaxonomy for the Bleeding subhierarchy in SNOMED's large Clinical finding hierarchy. To test the error concentration hypotheses, three domain experts reviewed a sample of 300 concepts. A consensus-based evaluation identified 87 erroneous concepts. The subtaxonomy-based TQA methodology was shown to uncover statistically significantly more erroneous concepts when compared to a control sample. Discussion The scalability of TQA methodologies is a challenge for large standards systems like SNOMED. We demonstrated innovative subject-based TQA techniques by identifying groups of concepts with a higher likelihood of having errors within the subtaxonomy. Scalability is achieved by reviewing a large hierarchy by subject. Conclusions An innovative methodology for scaling the derivation of AbNs and a TQA methodology was shown to perform successfully for the largest hierarchy of SNOMED.