Important Evaluation Factors of UML Tools for Health Informatics

Authors

  • Mageswari Rajoo School of Informatics and Applied Mathematics, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, 21030 Kuala Nerus, Terengganu, Malaysia.
  • Noor Maizura Mohamad Noor School of Informatics and Applied Mathematics, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, 21030 Kuala Nerus, Terengganu, Malaysia.

Keywords:

Empirical evaluation, Health Informatics, Software Development Life Cycle, Unified Modelling Language,

Abstract

Health Informatics (HI) is a multidisciplinary field that uses health information technology (HIT) to improve health care systems. A system which is given careful thought during the design phase in the Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC) covers the basic of the software design principles and caters for correctness and completeness of a system. Unified Modelling Language (UML) is a standard modeling language that is widely used in different industries; medical field included to support in SDLC. There are several UML modeling tools available out in the market, ranging from open-source tools to commercial tools. A common decision faced while applying UML in HI is the selection of an appropriate tool for modeling as it has a great impact on the overall success of an HI project. Appropriate tool selection can also be time-consuming. Because of these limitations, a framework for UML tool evaluation is introduced here for defining the suitability of UML tools for HI application. The objective of this research is to shortlist suitable UML tools specifically for HI related disciplinary regarding modeling effort required to complete a task correctly. Features and price list can easily be compared, but the productivity needs thorough empirical evaluation. This research presents a framework for an empirical study to evaluate the productivity of UML modeling tools suitable specifically for HI.

References

R. S. Pressman, and B. Maxim, Software Engineering: A Practitioner’s Approach, McGraw-Hill Education, 2014.

R. E. Hoyt, and A. Yoshihashi, Medical Informatics: Practical Guide for Healthcare and Information Technology Profesional. lulu.com, 2010.

World Health Organization, “Health information systems,” 2008. Available at http://www.who.int/healthinfo/statistics/toolkit_hss/EN_ PDF_Toolkit_HSS_InformationSystems.pdf

Object Management Group, “OMG unified modeling language specification v.2.5,” 2015. Available at http//www.omg.org.

R. Bendraaou, J. M. Jazequel, M. P. Gervais, and X. Blanc, “Comparison of six UML-based languages for software process modeling,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 662-675, 2010.

Public Health Informatics Institute, “Defining functional requirements for immunization information systems,” 2012. Available at https://www.phii.org/resources/view/2091/defining-functionalrequirements-immunization-information-systems.

C. Pahl, E. Supriyanto, and V. Detschew, “Evaluation of UML modeling tools for clinical pathways used in health information systems”, in 2015 10th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI), 2015, pp. 1-6.

A. Moreno-Conde, T. Austin, J. Moreno-Conde, and D. Kalva, “Evaluation of clinical information modeling tools,” Journal of the American Medical Informatics Associations, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 1127- 1135, 2016.

A. Funes, A. Dusso, C. Salgado, and M. Peralta, “UML tool evaluation requirement,” in Proceedings of ASIS 2005, 2005, pp. 1-11.

A. Dasso, A. Funes, M. Peralta, and C. Salgado, “Metrics development for UML tools evaluation”, in Proceedings of WICC 2005, 2005, pp. 286-290.

J. Merilinn, and M. Matinlassi, “Evaluation of UML tools for modeldriven architecture”, in 11th Nordic Workshop on Programing & Software Development Tools and Techniques, 2004, pp. 155-165.

S. A. Safdar, M. Z. Iqbal, and M. U. Khan, “Empirical evaluation of UML modeling tools - A controlled experiment,” in European Conference on Modeling Foundation and Applications (ECMFA 2015), 2015, pp. 33-44.

D. Silingas, and R. Butleris, “Towards implementing a framework for modeling software requirements in Magicdraw UML,” Information Technology and Control, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 153-164, 2009.

T. Mayerhofer, and P. Langer, “Moliz: A model execution framework for UML models,” in MW '12 Proceedings of the 2nd International Master Class on Model-Driven Engineering: Modeling Wizards, 2012, pp.1-3.

C.-L. Lazar, I. Lazar, B. Parv, S. Motogna, and I.-G. Czibula, “Tool Support for fUML Models”, Int. Journal of Computers, Communications & Control, vol. 5, no.5, pp. 775-782, 2010.

T. Rani, and S. Garg, “Comparison of different UML tool: Tool approach”, International Journal of Engineering and Computer Science 2, pp. 1900-1908, 2013.

C. P. Friedman, and J. Wyatt, Evaluation Methods in Biomedical Informatics (Health Informatics), Paperback, 2010.

K. Daimi, L. Li, X. Lu, and N. El-Nazeer, “Requirements engineering for home health care software systems,” in Proceedings of the 2010 International Conference on Software Engineering Research & Practice, 2010, pp. 83-91.

B. P. Douglass, Real Time UML: Advances in The UML for Real-Time Systems. Addison-Wesley Professional, 2004.

P. J. Blignaut, T. McDonald, and C. J. Tolmie, “System requirements for a computerised patient record information system at a busy primary health care clinic,” Pubmed, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 68-76, 2001.

Merriam-Webster, Incorporated, “Merriam-Webster dictionary”, www.merriam-webster.com

Downloads

Published

2017-10-20

How to Cite

Rajoo, M., & Mohamad Noor, N. M. (2017). Important Evaluation Factors of UML Tools for Health Informatics. Journal of Telecommunication, Electronic and Computer Engineering (JTEC), 9(3-3), 191–195. Retrieved from https://jtec.utem.edu.my/jtec/article/view/2901

Issue

Vol. 9 No. 3-3: Special Issue on Software Engineering I

Section

Articles

License

TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AGREEMENT

The manuscript is herewith submitted for publication in the Journal of Telecommunication, Electronic and Computer Engineering (JTEC). It has not been published before, and it is not under consideration for publication in any other journals. It contains no material that is scandalous, obscene, libelous or otherwise contrary to law. When the manuscript is accepted for publication, I, as the author, hereby agree to transfer to JTEC, all rights including those pertaining to electronic forms and transmissions, under existing copyright laws, except for the following, which the author(s) specifically retain(s):

  1. All proprietary right other than copyright, such as patent rights
  2. The right to make further copies of all or part of the published article for my use in classroom teaching
  3. The right to reuse all or part of this manuscript in a compilation of my own works or in a textbook of which I am the author; and
  4. The right to make copies of the published work for internal distribution within the institution that employs me

I agree that copies made under these circumstances will continue to carry the copyright notice that appears in the original published work. I agree to inform my co-authors, if any, of the above terms. I certify that I have obtained written permission for the use of text, tables, and/or illustrations from any copyrighted source(s), and I agree to supply such written permission(s) to JTEC upon request.