Peer to Patent, Community Patent Review

APPLICATION LIST|ARCHIVED APPLICATIONS|US PATENT CLASSIFICATIONS

Home > Archived Applications > 20070226167 > Discussion

Pre-Grant Publication Number: 20070226167

Systems and methods for clinical decision crawler agent

Collaborate on the process of community review for this application. Posting will not be forwarded to the USPTO. Flagging a post as an ACTION ITEM signals further research. Flagging SPAM and ABUSE helps to manage discussion. Placing double brackets around a reference to a claim or prior art will create a hyperlink to the original ex. [[claim 1]] and [[prior art 2]].

Please review the Community Code of Conduct prior to posting

Discussion (6)

View: Date|Claims|Prior Art|Action Item|

Facilitator's Comment

Action Item

Show without Noise

Sandeep Sharma (9 months ago)

The prior art 20040122702 is a co-pending application of US20040122709 submitted earlier on this forum (please note the prior art #121). '702 has the same inventors, same filing date, and substantially similar description as that of ‘709. In general, I agree that all the family members/co-pending applications with similar description would qualify as prior art for this case. Please note that only 10 references will be reviewed by the USPTO examiner(s) and therefore, we should submit unique (unrelated) references for each case.

Tim Davies (9 months ago)

This may also limit the right of a doctor, if the doctor were to use any subcomponents of the nural net or ai system defined by this application. It would all but eliminate the use of ai in medicine for diagnosis.
In addition almost all automated diagnostic tests could become part of such a system and as such be limited

Fulton Wilcox (9 months ago)

There exist a plethora of seach-related patents, and search in a medical context is not inherently different from search in many other contexts. I appended three fairly recent patents in the same general area, and there are many more. Claims such as using a patient ID as a search argument in looking for patient data can hardly be novel, nor is searching multiple remote databases. Although something novel and non-obvious may be represented in this application, it does not jump out of the writeup. Mapping "evidence" to some diagnosis or clinical recommendation is challenging, but not well described and perhaps not part of the claims.

7,313,588 Locally executing software agent for retrieving remote content and method for creation and use of the agent

7,117,202 System and method for computer based searches using genetic algorithms

7,043,521 Search agent for searching the internet

Fulton Wilcox (9 months ago)

Regarding Claim 00001 It is not clear whether the requested patent is wholly dependent or not dependent at all on a coupling of the search agent and the recommendation component. There is little desrciption of the recommendation component even though the process of automating the evidence to recommendation would seem have the most likely claim to novelty.

Tim Davies (9 months ago)

This is just a data base miner. there is nothing inventive. This application anticipates "cloud" computing and distributed data storage locations. It is wordcrafting at best

Jayakanth Govindarajan (9 months ago)

Bioprofiling over grid for eHealthcare by sun et al. talks about searching medical profiles in various sources located across different geographies thorugh crawler. It describes about sharing of bioprofile databases, acquisition and analysis of bioprofiles to combat major diseases on an individual basis. (section 3.1)As the publishing date of this article is jun'2006 I am not uploading it.

0 days left