Yes, we did that from IMO and I included in that in some... however, it is not at all consistent. Where we have it, we should use it. There shouldn't be dupes with the same map type. I will look through this...
Thanks! Andy P.S. Great news about MDS... now just need to fix the concepts :) -------------------- Andrew S. Kanter, MD MPH - Director of Health Information Systems/Medical Informatics Millennium Villages Project, Earth Institute, Columbia University - Asst. Prof. of Clinical Biomedical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology Columbia University Email: [email protected] Mobile: +1 (646) 469-2421 Office: +1 (212) 305-4842 Skype: akanter-ippnw Yahoo: andy_kanter >________________________________ > From: Rafal Korytkowski <[email protected]> >To: [email protected] >Sent: Friday, May 4, 2012 11:08 AM >Subject: [OPENMRS-DEV] Migrating concept mappings to 1.9 > > >Hi Andy, > >We have noticed that MVP uses the comment field in the concept_map table. We >are considering using that to determine the right map type in 1.9. > >I ran the following query select comment, count(*) from concept_map group by >comment; The results are below. I have also added corresponding map types from >1.9, but I am not sure if they match right now. We could correct them if >needed. > >+----------------------+----------+ >| comment | count(*) | >+----------------------+----------+ >| NULL | 15516 | >| From Excel | 2381 | >| From UMLS RxNORM Map | 3010 | >| Map Type: 1 | 46897 | (SAME-AS) >| Map Type: 10 | 1 | (Has specimen) >| Map Type: 17 | 5 | (Direct device) >| Map Type: 19 | 3 | (Direct substance) >| Map Type: 2 | 1880 | (NARROWER-THAN) >| Map Type: 24 | 18 | (Finding method) >| Map Type: 3 | 30841 | (BROADER-THAN) >| Map Type: 4 | 126 | (Associated finding) >| Map Type: 5 | 81 | (Associated morphology) >| Map Type: 6 | 19 | (Associated procedure) >| Map Type: 7 | 2 | (Associated with) >+----------------------+----------+ >14 rows in set (2.12 sec) > >Here's the proposed migration algorithm: > >(1) if the comment matches "Map Type: (\d+)" then use that to determine the >map type, and drop it > >(2) otherwise move the comment to concept_reference_term.description (even >though it doesn't really belong there) > >(3) delete duplicate concept_reference_terms (having same source and >source_code), though this means we may lose some concept_map.comment data > > >The reason for these changes is: TRUNK-3296: Found multiple reference terms >https://tickets.openmrs.org/browse/TRUNK-3296 >-Rafał >________________________________ > Click here to unsubscribe from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list > > _________________________________________ To unsubscribe from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list, send an e-mail to [email protected] with "SIGNOFF openmrs-devel-l" in the body (not the subject) of your e-mail. [mailto:[email protected]?body=SIGNOFF%20openmrs-devel-l]
