JP7482626B2 - Medical Information Processing System - Google Patents

Description

The present invention relates to a system that assists in inputting a follow-up period, which indicates the period until the next examination.

Patent Document 1 discloses a technology that refers to a standard period reference table based on the condition of the abnormal area described in the examination result record of a person who needs examination, reads out the interval until the next examination recommended for the person who needs examination, and calculates the recommended time for the next examination by adding the read interval to the examination date.

JP 2010-113543 A

When an abnormality is found during an examination and follow-up observation is required, it is desirable to schedule a follow-up examination. Therefore, when a doctor registers the diagnosis information of the current examination in the database, he or she also determines the follow-up period, which indicates the period until the next examination, and registers this in the database. By registering the follow-up period, the hospital can send an invitation to the subject when the follow-up period has elapsed since the date of the previous examination, encouraging them to visit the hospital. In order to send invitations at the appropriate time, it is necessary for the appropriate follow-up period to be registered.

The present invention has been made in consideration of these circumstances, and its purpose is to provide a technology that assists in inputting the follow-up period.

In order to solve the above problem, a medical information processing system according to one embodiment of the present invention includes a storage unit that stores diagnostic information and performance information including a follow-up period indicating the period until the next examination in association with doctor identification information that identifies the doctor, a derivation unit that derives a reference value for the follow-up period from the performance information of multiple examinations stored in the storage unit, a screen generation unit that generates an input screen for inputting the diagnostic information and the follow-up period, a reception unit that receives input of the diagnostic information and the follow-up period, and an input support unit that displays information related to the follow-up period on the input screen when the input follow-up period differs from the reference value for the follow-up period.

In addition, any combination of the above components, and any transformation of the present invention into a method, device, system, recording medium, computer program, etc., are also valid aspects of the present invention.

The present invention provides a technology that assists in inputting the follow-up period.

FIG. 2 is a diagram showing functional blocks of the medical information processing system. FIG. 13 illustrates an example of a report input screen. 13 is a diagram showing an example of a diagnostic information input area on a report input screen. FIG. 13 is a diagram showing another example of a diagnostic information input area on the report input screen. FIG. 13 is a diagram showing an example of an input screen for post-examination instructions/complications/various comments. FIG. 13 is a diagram illustrating an extract of the correspondence between diagnosis information and follow-up periods. FIG. 13 is a diagram illustrating an example of a process for deriving a reference follow-up period. FIG. 13 illustrates a report input screen. FIG. 13 is a diagram showing an example of an input screen for post-examination instructions/complications/various comments. FIG. 13 is a diagram showing an example of information regarding a follow-up period. FIG. 13 is a diagram showing another example of information regarding a follow-up period. 1 is a graph depicting the performance over the follow-up period.

Figure 1 shows functional blocks of a medical information processing system 1 according to an embodiment. The medical information processing system 1 according to the embodiment is installed in a medical facility such as a hospital, and assists doctors in creating reports on endoscopic examinations. The medical information processing system 1 includes a management server 10 and multiple information processing devices 30, and the management server 10 and the information processing devices 30 are connected by a network 2 such as a LAN (local area network).

The management server 10 includes a registration unit 12, a storage unit 14, a derivation unit 16, and a provision unit 18. The storage unit 14 receives image data captured during an endoscopic examination from an endoscopic observation device (not shown), and records the image data in association with an examination ID that identifies the examination. Note that in a medical facility, the storage unit 14 that records the image data may be provided separately from the management server 10.

The information processing device 30 is a terminal device such as a personal computer, and is connected to a user interface such as a keyboard and a mouse, and is connected to a display device 80 so as to be capable of display output. The information processing device 30 may be a laptop computer integrated with a display device, or may be a portable tablet. The information processing device 30 of the embodiment displays an input screen on the display device 80 for a doctor to input diagnostic information of the examination and a follow-up period indicating the period until the next examination.

The information processing device 30 accesses the management server 10 and displays multiple examination images recorded in the memory unit 14 on the display device 80. When the doctor creates an endoscopic examination report, the information processing device 30 reads out thumbnail images of all examination images recorded in the memory unit 14 in association with the examination ID, and displays them on the display device 80. The doctor operates the user interface to select an examination image to be attached to the report from the displayed thumbnail list. The doctor also operates the user interface to input medical information, including diagnosis information and follow-up period, into the input screen.

In the management server 10, the registration unit 12 associates the medical information, including the diagnosis information, report attachment image, and follow-up period, entered on the report input screen with doctor identification information (doctor ID) that identifies the doctor who entered the information, and stores the information in the memory unit 14 as report information.

The information processing device 30 includes a reception unit 40, a screen generation unit 50, an image acquisition unit 52, an input support unit 54, a memory 56, and a registration processing unit 58. The reception unit 40 has a function of receiving operation input of a user interface by a doctor, and includes a display request reception unit 42, a medical information reception unit 44, and a specified information reception unit 46.

In terms of hardware, these configurations can be realized by any processor, memory, or other LSI, and in terms of software, they can be realized by programs loaded into memory, but here we depict functional blocks realized by their cooperation. Therefore, those skilled in the art will understand that these functional blocks can be realized in various forms by hardware alone, software alone, or a combination of both. Although the information processing device 30 is a terminal device, some of the functional blocks shown as functions of the information processing device 30 may be provided on the management server 10 side, and some of the functional blocks shown as functions of the management server 10 may be provided on the information processing device 30 side.

After the endoscopic examination is completed, the doctor logs in by entering a user ID and password into the information processing device 30 in order to create an endoscopic examination report. When the doctor logs in, an application for creating an examination report is automatically started, and a list of examinations that have been performed is displayed on the display device 80. This list of performed examinations displays examination information such as the patient name, patient ID, examination date and time, and examination type, and the doctor selects the examination for which a report will be created. When the doctor selects an examination for which an examination report is to be created from the list of performed examinations, the display request receiving unit 42 receives a request to display the report input screen, and the image acquisition unit 52 acquires a thumbnail of the examination image linked to the examination ID of the selected examination from the memory unit 14.

Figure 2 shows an example of a report input screen. When the display request receiving unit 42 receives a request to display the report input screen, the screen generating unit 50 generates a report input screen for the doctor to input diagnostic information, and displays it on the display device 80. While the report input screen is displayed, the report tab 100b is selected.

The upper section of the report input screen displays the patient's name, patient ID, date of birth, type of test, date of test, and information about the doctor performing the test. The report input screen is made up of multiple areas, with a test image display area 102 on the left side that displays thumbnails of the test images. On the right side are a diagnosis information input area 110 where the doctor inputs test results such as diagnosis details, a selection area 112 for displaying a screen for inputting the details of the "overall diagnosis," a selection area 114 for displaying a screen for inputting the details of "post-test instructions/complications/various comments," and a selection area 116 for displaying a screen for inputting the details of the "executor information."

The screen generating unit 50 displays thumbnails 104a-104l of the examination images acquired by the image acquiring unit 52 from the storage unit 14 in an order in the examination image display area 102. A scroll bar is provided on the right side of the examination image display area 102, and the doctor can observe all thumbnails of the examination images by operating the scroll bar to scroll the image list. When the doctor operates the user interface to select an examination image to be attached to the report, the medical information accepting unit 44 accepts information identifying the selected examination image and stores it in the memory 56. When the recorded image tab 100a is selected, the screen generating unit 50 displays a list of thumbnails of the examination images on the entire screen. The thumbnail list is displayed large, allowing the doctor to grasp the overview of the endoscopic examination.

The diagnostic information input area 110 is an area for the doctor to input diagnostic information that will be the examination result, and in the illustrated example, areas are provided for inputting diagnostic information for the "esophagus," "stomach," and "duodenum," which are the observation ranges in an upper endoscopy examination. The diagnostic information input area 110 has a format that displays multiple options for diagnostic content items and allows the doctor to input diagnostic information by selecting check boxes. When the doctor inputs the diagnostic information, the medical information receiving unit 44 receives the input of the diagnostic information and stores it in the memory 56.

Figure 3 shows an example of the diagnostic information input area 110 of the report input screen. In this example, "stomach" is selected as the observed organ and "qualitative diagnosis" is selected as the diagnostic item, so the qualitative diagnosis items for the stomach are displayed as selectable items in the diagnostic information input area 110. When the mouse cursor is placed over each item, the detailed items one level below are displayed as selectable items. Figure 3 shows the mouse cursor being placed over the "atrophic gastritis" item, with the atrophy classification options for atrophic gastritis displayed in the atrophy classification window 120.

Figure 4 shows another example of the diagnostic information input area 110 of the report input screen. In this example, "stomach" is selected as the observed organ and "qualitative diagnosis" is selected as the diagnostic item, and the qualitative diagnosis items for the stomach are displayed as selectable items in the diagnostic information input area 110. Figure 4 shows the mouse cursor being placed over the "adenoma" item, and a window displaying the options for adenoma classification one level below.

On the report input screen, the doctor selects the examination image to be attached to the report from the examination image display area 102, and inputs the diagnostic information in the diagnostic information input area 110. A mark indicating the selection may be displayed in a check box arranged nearby the selected examination image or diagnostic information. The medical information receiving unit 44 receives the examination image selection information and the diagnostic information, and stores them in the memory 56. When the doctor has completed inputting the diagnostic information in the diagnostic information input area 110, he or she appropriately selects the selection areas 112, 114, 116 (see FIG. 2) and inputs the necessary information. The case where the doctor selects the selection area 114 will be described below.

When the doctor selects the selection area 114, the display request receiving unit 42 receives a request to display a screen for inputting the contents of "Post-examination instructions/complications/various comments", and the screen generating unit 50 generates an input screen for "Post-examination instructions/complications/various comments" and displays it on the display device 80. This input screen may be superimposed on the report input screen.

Figure 5 shows an example of an input screen for post-examination instructions/complications/various comments. From this input screen, the doctor inputs various medical information other than diagnosis information. In the follow-up period input field 122 of this input screen, the doctor inputs the follow-up period indicating the period from the current examination to the next examination. If no abnormality is found as a result of the endoscopic examination, the follow-up period is set to a long period (for example, two years), whereas if any abnormality such as gastritis or adenoma is found, the follow-up period is set to a short period. In this case, the follow-up period is determined according to the degree of the abnormality. When the doctor sets the follow-up period and presses the OK button 92, the medical information receiving unit 44 receives the set follow-up period and stores it in the memory 56.

When the doctor operates the registration button 90 after inputting information about the examination, the registration processing unit 58 sends the information stored in the memory 56 to the management server 10. The memory 56 stores medical information including the diagnosis information entered on the report input screen, identification information of the examination image selected as an image to be attached to the report, and the follow-up period, as well as examination information such as the patient's name, patient ID, date of birth, examination type, examination date, and performing doctor. The registration processing unit 58 instructs the management server 10 to register the medical information and examination information in the memory unit 14.

In the management server 10, the registration unit 12 registers the medical information and examination information as report information in the memory unit 14 in association with the doctor ID based on instructions from the registration processing unit 58. The report information stored in the memory unit 14 is printed in a specified format and used as an examination report. The doctor creates a report each time an examination is completed, and the input report information is stored in the memory unit 14.

Hereinafter, the report information stored in the memory unit 14 will be referred to as "performance information." The performance information, including diagnostic information of the test and the follow-up period, is stored in the memory unit 14 in association with a doctor ID. Taking advantage of the fact that the follow-up period is determined based on the diagnostic information, the medical information processing system 1 of the embodiment assists a doctor in inputting an appropriate follow-up period when creating a report, based on the corresponding relationship between the diagnostic information and the follow-up period in the performance information.

In the management server 10, the derivation unit 16 derives a reference value for the follow-up period from the performance information of multiple tests stored in the memory unit 14. Below, an example is shown in which the "mode" is derived as the reference value, but other statistical values, such as the average value or the median value, may also be derived.

Figure 6 shows an excerpt of the correspondence between diagnosis information and follow-up periods in the performance information. This performance information was created by Doctor B. Here, "atrophic gastritis" is a first-level item in qualitative diagnosis, and "atrophic classification" is a second-level item below "atrophic gastritis." In this example, the follow-up period set when Doctor B diagnosed the atrophy as O-I, O-II, or O-III among the atrophy classifications shown in the atrophy classification window 120 in Figure 3 is shown. Below, the process in which the derivation unit 16 derives the reference value of the follow-up period for atrophic gastritis will be described.

Figure 7 shows an example of a process for deriving a reference follow-up period. The derivation unit 16 acquires from the memory unit 14 performance information on multiple tests performed when Doctor B diagnosed atrophic gastritis (S10). This performance information is as shown in Figure 6, and there are 26 relevant tests, with the breakdown of second-level items being O-III in 11 cases, O-II in 7 cases, and O-I in 8 cases.

The derivation unit 16 identifies the most frequent value of the first level items, and derives the proportion of the identified most frequent value (S12).
<First level item: Atrophic gastritis>
Statistics from the follow-up period of 26 cases showed that:
- 6 months: 11 cases - 1 year: 13 cases - 2 years: 2 cases. Therefore, it is derived that the most frequent value is "1 year", and the proportion of the most frequent value in the whole is 50% (13 cases/26 cases). Based on the proportion of the most frequent value "1 year" in the whole, the derivation unit 16 determines whether the most frequent value is appropriate as a follow-up period for subjects with atrophic gastritis.

The derivation unit 16 then determines whether the proportion of the mode is equal to or greater than a predetermined threshold (S14). The predetermined threshold is a comparison value for determining whether the mode is appropriate as a reference value for the follow-up period, and is determined by the medical facility. For example, when the proportion of the mode in the total is 30%, it is difficult to say that this mode is appropriate as a reference value for the follow-up period. From this perspective, the predetermined threshold may be determined as appropriate, and is set to 80% in the embodiment.

If the proportion of the most frequent value is equal to or greater than the threshold value (Y in S14), the derivation unit 16 sets the most frequent value, "one year," as the standard value for the follow-up period (S20). This standard value is a guideline for the follow-up period when the same diagnosis information is input by Doctor B. In other words, if Doctor B diagnoses "atrophic gastritis," this means that the follow-up period, which is the standard value, has been input in many past test reports. Note that the standard value is merely a guideline, and even if Doctor B sets a follow-up period different from the standard value, this does not immediately result in an input error. A follow-up period different from the standard value may be appropriate depending on the individual circumstances of the subject (for example, circumstances due to the medical interview information).

In the above example, the proportion of the most frequent value "1 year" is 50%, which is less than the threshold value (N in S14), so the derivation unit 16 identifies the most frequent value of the second hierarchical item and derives the proportion of the identified most frequent value (S16). If the most frequent value of the first hierarchical item cannot be used as the reference value for the follow-up period, the derivation unit 16 attempts to determine whether it is possible to derive a reference value for the follow-up period by further narrowing the conditions. In the example shown in FIG. 6, the derivation unit 16 identifies the most frequent value for each of the atrophy classifications O-I, O-II, and O-III, and derives the proportion of the most frequent value.

<First hierarchical item: atrophic gastritis, second hierarchical item: O-III>
- 6 months: 10 cases - 1 year: 1 case For O-III, the most frequent value is "6 months", and the proportion of the most frequent value is 91% (10 cases/11 cases). The derivation unit 16 determines that the proportion of the most frequent value "6 months" is equal to or greater than the threshold value (80%) (Y of S18), and sets the most frequent value "6 months" as the reference value for the follow-up period of patients diagnosed with "atrophic gastritis" and "O-III" (S20).

<First hierarchical item: atrophic gastritis, second hierarchical item: O-II>
- 6 months: 1 case - 1 year: 6 cases For O-II, the most frequent value is "1 year", and the proportion of the most frequent value is 86% (6 cases/7 cases). The derivation unit 16 determines that the proportion of the most frequent value "1 year" is equal to or greater than the threshold value (80%) (Y of S18), and sets the most frequent value "1 year" as the reference value for the follow-up period of patients diagnosed with "atrophic gastritis" and "O-II" (S20).

<First level item: atrophic gastritis, second level item: O-I>
1 year: 6 cases 2 years: 2 cases For O-I, the most frequent value is "1 year", and the proportion of the most frequent value is 75% (6 cases/8 cases). The derivation unit 16 determines that the proportion of the most frequent value, "1 year", is less than the threshold value (80%) (N of S18), and does not set a reference value for the follow-up period for patients diagnosed with "atrophic gastritis" and "O-I".

The derivation unit 16 may perform the above-mentioned process of deriving the reference values before Doctor B starts creating the report, or may perform the process while Doctor B is creating the report, in accordance with the diagnostic information input by Doctor B.

The report creation process by Doctor B will be described below.
On the report input screen shown in FIG. 3, Doctor B selects “O-III” included in the atrophy classification window 120 .
8 shows the report input screen when "O-III" is selected. When the medical information accepting unit 44 accepts the selection information of "O-III", it notifies the input support unit 54 of the input diagnostic information. The input support unit 54 transmits the diagnostic information input by Doctor B to the management server 10, and requests a reference value for the follow-up period corresponding to the diagnostic information.

The derivation unit 16 receives the diagnostic information of atrophic gastritis and O-III, and derives a reference value of the follow-up period corresponding to the diagnostic information of atrophic gastritis and O-III from Doctor B's past performance information. When requested by the input support unit 54, the derivation unit 16 derives the reference value of the follow-up period using performance information related to the diagnostic information, but may derive the reference value of the follow-up period corresponding to each diagnostic information periodically (for example, once a week). The provision unit 18 provides the information processing device 30 with the reference value of the follow-up period corresponding to the diagnostic information of atrophic gastritis and O-III. In the above example, the reference value of the follow-up period corresponding to the diagnostic information of atrophic gastritis and O-III is "6 months". The input support unit 54 acquires the reference value of the follow-up period.

Thereafter, Doctor B completes input of the diagnosis information in the diagnosis information input area 110, selects the selection area 114, and causes the display device 80 to display an input screen for "Post-examination instructions/complications/various comments."
9 shows an example of an input screen for post-examination instructions/complications/various comments. Doctor B sets the follow-up period in the follow-up period input field 122. In this example, it is set to "one year." When Doctor B presses the OK button 92, the medical information accepting unit 44 accepts the input of the follow-up period and notifies the input support unit 54.

The input support unit 54 compares the follow-up period entered by Doctor B with the reference value of the follow-up period obtained from the management server 10. If the two match, the input support unit 54 determines that the follow-up period entered in the follow-up period input field 122 is appropriate. On the other hand, if the two do not match, the input support unit 54 determines that the follow-up period entered in the follow-up period input field 122 may be inappropriate. At this time, the input support unit 54 displays information about the follow-up period on the input screen.

Figure 10 shows an example of information related to the follow-up period. If the follow-up period entered by Doctor B differs from the standard value, the input support unit 54 displays an alert message 124 as information indicating that the entered follow-up period differs from the standard value. Note that the follow-up period is determined taking into consideration the individual circumstances of the subject, and therefore even if the entered follow-up period deviates from the standard value, it is not determined to be inappropriate. The alert message 124 is displayed to Doctor B only as reference information, and after the alert message 124 is displayed, Doctor B may or may not modify the period set in the follow-up period input field 122.

When Doctor B presses the OK button 92 while the alert message 124 is displayed, the medical information receiving unit 44 receives the input of the follow-up period of "one year" and stores it in the memory 56. After the alert message 124 is displayed once, the medical information receiving unit 44 does not need to notify the input support unit 54 of the received follow-up period.

Figure 11 shows another example of information related to the follow-up period. When the follow-up period entered by Doctor B differs from the reference value, the input support unit 54 displays a list display button 126 to enable viewing of past results. When Doctor B presses the list display button 126, a list of performance information of Doctor B's past diagnoses of atrophic gastritis and O-III may be displayed. This list of performance information is displayed in association with the follow-up period set for each test.

Doctor B has set a follow-up period of "6 months" for 10 past examinations and a follow-up period of "1 year" for one examination, and may refer to the reports of the examinations for which he set "1 year" in the past to check whether the follow-up period of "1 year" that he set this time was appropriate. When displaying the list, the input support unit 54 may exclude from the display list any performance information in which the follow-up period is clearly entered incorrectly (for example, the follow-up period is set to "1 day").

In the above embodiment, the derivation unit 16 derived the reference value of the follow-up period corresponding to the diagnosis information from the performance information of Doctor B who creates the report. This allows Doctor B to confirm his/her own thoughts about the follow-up period in the past.

On the other hand, if Doctor B is an inexperienced doctor (e.g., a trainee), it is preferable to compare the entered follow-up period with the past performance of an experienced doctor who performs many tests, rather than comparing it with his/her own past performance. Therefore, Doctor B may be able to arbitrarily select the doctor whose performance information he/she wants to compare and reference. In this case, only one doctor may be selected, but it is preferable to be able to select for each diagnosis. In particular, in large-scale medical facilities, there is a specialist for each case, so it is preferable for Doctor B to be able to study how the specialist sets the follow-up period for each case. Therefore, Doctor B specifies the doctor to refer to for the follow-up period according to the diagnosis information, and the specified information receiving unit 46 receives the doctor ID to refer to the follow-up period and notifies the input support unit 54.

When Doctor B is creating a report, the input support unit 54 inputs diagnostic information, and then transmits the input diagnostic information along with the doctor ID designated for that diagnostic information to the management server 10, and requests a standard value for the follow-up period by the designated doctor. The derivation unit 16 accepts the diagnostic information and the designated doctor ID, and derives a standard value for the follow-up period corresponding to that diagnostic information from performance information for multiple tests associated with the designated doctor ID. This allows Doctor B to refer to the standard value for the follow-up period by the designated doctor.

If the medical information processing system 1 is linked to systems in other medical facilities, Doctor B may be able to specify not only doctors in the same medical facility, but also doctors in other facilities. In this case, it is preferable to impose restrictions that prevent Doctor B from viewing personal information such as patient information.

The derivation unit 16 may derive the standard value of the follow-up period from the performance information of all doctors in the facility, rather than from the performance information of a specific doctor. Note that the criteria for setting the follow-up period may differ for each doctor, so it is not likely that 80% of all doctors will select the same follow-up period for a specific diagnosis. In such a case, the input support unit 54 may display information related to the follow-up period that allows the distribution of past performance to be understood.

For example, when Doctor B selects the list display button 126 shown in FIG. 11, the input support unit 54 may display a graph of past results.
12 shows a graph expressing the results of the follow-up period in a medical facility. The input support unit 54 expresses the past results in a graph format, so that Doctor B can intuitively grasp the degree of dispersion of the past follow-up periods. When Doctor B places the cursor on a bar graph, a list of the results information constituting the bar graph is displayed, and the content of the results information may be displayed by selecting any of the results information. The input support unit 54 may also reflect the follow-up period shown in the graph in the follow-up period input field 122 by a predetermined operation. When the medical information processing system 1 is linked to another medical system, the input support unit 54 may express the follow-up period for each facility in a graph format so as to be comparable.

The present invention has been described above based on examples. These examples are merely illustrative, and those skilled in the art will understand that various modifications are possible in the combination of each component and each treatment process, and that such modifications are also within the scope of the present invention.

In the embodiment, atrophic gastritis and atrophy classification are used as diagnostic information used to derive the reference value for the follow-up period, but other diagnostic information may be used. For example, while a diagnostic item for adenoma is shown in FIG. 4, diagnostic information based on a combination of adenoma and classification may be used to derive the reference value for the follow-up period. Note that in the embodiment, as shown in FIG. 7, the derivation unit 16 automatically determines the diagnostic item used to derive the reference value using a threshold value, but Doctor B may manually select which diagnostic item is used to derive the reference value for the follow-up period. Note that if a diagnostic item to be used to derive the reference value is set and the diagnostic item is not input, the doctor may be notified that there is an omission in the input.

1: medical information processing system, 10: management server, 12: registration unit, 14: storage unit, 16: derivation unit, 18: provision unit, 30: information processing device, 40: reception unit, 42: display request reception unit, 44: medical information reception unit, 46: specified information reception unit, 50: screen generation unit, 52: image acquisition unit, 54: input support unit, 56: memory, 58: registration processing unit, 80: display device.

Claims (5)

a storage unit that stores the diagnosis information and performance information including a follow-up period indicating a period until the next examination in association with doctor identification information that identifies a doctor;
a derivation unit that derives a reference value for a follow-up period from performance information of a plurality of examinations stored in the storage unit;
a screen generating unit for generating an input screen for inputting diagnostic information and a follow-up period;
a reception unit for receiving input of diagnosis information and a follow-up period;
an input support unit that displays information about the follow-up period on the input screen when the input follow-up period is different from the reference value of the follow-up period;
A medical information processing system comprising: The derivation unit derives a mode of the follow-up period.
2. The medical information processing system according to claim 1. the input support unit displays, on the input screen, information indicating that the follow -up period is different from the reference value.
2. The medical information processing system according to claim 1. The input support unit displays a list of performance information including the diagnosis information received by the reception unit.
2. The medical information processing system according to claim 1. The derivation unit derives the reference value of the follow-up period from performance information of a plurality of examinations associated with doctor identification information designated for the diagnosis information accepted by the acceptance unit.
2. The medical information processing system according to claim 1.

Images