I still feel that the source of the data is an important aspect that we
need to be maintained. And the CDM Modifiers are not specific enough to
describe the data. We could add a second modifier to every diagnosis. The
negative being that a billing admit primary diagnosis requires three
entries into the observation fact table the the single observation. One
for source, one for admit, and one for primary.
If we must change it, I¹d suggest the following, and give the folders a
concept_cd so that the epic sites can continue with the existing model and
other sites can go deeper on the primary/non-primary for admit and
discharge encounter diagnosis:
* Encounter Dx
* Encounter Dx Primary
* Encounter Dx Non-Primary
* Encounter Admit
* Encounter Admit Primary
* Encounter Admit Non-Primary
* Encounter Discharge
* Encounter Discharge Primary
* Encounter Discharge Non-Primary
If there is an additional source, or modifier that a site needs, we can
save it up for a future release, but we need to lock the changes on this
at some point so that we can move on.
Phillip
On 3/17/15, 12:29 PM, "GPC Informatics" <d...@madmode.com> wrote:
>#90: Diagnoses Modifiers for data attribution
>--------------------------+----------------------------
> Reporter: campbell | Owner: huhickman
> Type: design-issue | Status: assigned
> Priority: major | Milestone: data-domains2
>Component: data-stds | Resolution:
> Keywords: | Blocked By:
> Blocking: 70, 91, 216 |
>--------------------------+----------------------------
>
>Comment (by nateapathy):
>
> I agree - it may be more straightforward to use the CDM as our guiding
> design target rather than the intricacies of each EHR and the source
> tables we have available. While my proposed hierarchy above leverages the
> "deep" approach to it's fullest capacity, the Dev call discussion today
> has proven that in practice that granularity isn't practical given the
> source data. At the risk of invalidating the amount of conversation had
> thus far, I think it's worthwhile to pursue Laurel's suggestion above.
> Perhaps plus "PR" and "NP" for primary and nonprimary?
>
>--
>Ticket URL:
><http://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/ticket/90#comment:31>
>gpc-informatics <http://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/>
>Greater Plains Network - Informatics
>_______________________________________________
>Gpc-dev mailing list
>Gpc-dev@listserv.kumc.edu
>http://listserv.kumc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gpc-dev
________________________________
UT Southwestern
Medical Center
The future of medicine, today.
_______________________________________________
Gpc-dev mailing list
Gpc-dev@listserv.kumc.edu
http://listserv.kumc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gpc-dev
