Nate, Thanks for sharing these numbers on terms matched and volume/facts matched. This is exactly the sort of data that we originally proposed to collect:
* GPC Interoperable Standardization Measurement Framework<https://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/wiki/DataStandardization#data-stds-framework> I just created a spreadsheet and put those numbers in it: * GPC Terminology Alignment Progress<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ywbW9rusve8sptB9RVESnpGwRUnwSJ9q_tBakhE8INo/edit?usp=sharing> Bonus points to anyone else who shares similar sorts of data. Tom, Jim, I hope the QA queries will produce this sort of data. I'm interested to know if you think that's feasible in this March go-round. -- Dan ________________________________ From: gpc-dev-boun...@listserv.kumc.edu [gpc-dev-boun...@listserv.kumc.edu] on behalf of Apathy,Nate [nate.apa...@cerner.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 2:37 PM To: Russ Waitman Cc: gpc-dev@listserv.kumc.edu Subject: RE: Medication Mapping Issue Hi all, We’ve been exploring a similar issue with medication mapping to the central RxCUI ontology proposed by KUMC. Though we’re not an Epic site, we are in the middle of transitioning from NDC to RxCUI/RxNORM as our primary medication terminology in order to align with GPC. We’ve done several mappings using different versions of mapping content from NDC to RxCUI, and our closest match (to the ontology) merits about 2,300 matches with the RxCUI ontology out on Babel, which contains about 5,500 RxCUI codes. We have 11,000 unique RxCUI codes from our mappings using the USNLM mapping content, so we’re not getting a good amount of those represented with the current GPC RxCUI ontology. The real kicker is that those 2,300 matches only represent about 1.5% of the total volume of medication data that we have, so while it is about half of the ontology, it’s significantly less representative of the total amount of potential data that could be represented if all of our codes were matched in the ontology. We’re wondering if the ontology is at a specific level of granularity that we haven’t accommodated in our mappings, which is making our terms misalign with the precise codes used in the GPC RxCUI ontology. Any help would be greatly appreciated! Thanks for raising this question, Phillip! Nate Apathy Solution Manager: i2b2, Cerner Research From: gpc-dev-boun...@listserv.kumc.edu [mailto:gpc-dev-boun...@listserv.kumc.edu] On Behalf Of Russ Waitman Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 1:29 PM To: Bonnie Westra Cc: gpc-dev@listserv.kumc.edu Subject: Re: Medication Mapping Issue Somewhat similar to Nathan’s experience incorporating the MedEx NLP work for meds here in KC to RxNorm that is documented in the HERON code and informatics.kumc.edu<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__informatics.kumc.edu&d=AwMF-g&c=NRtzTzKNaCCmhN_9N2YJR-XrNU1huIgYP99yDsEzaJo&r=uOh5Q3hepVRzk8WwKUjG80B3swu7bu8ArEfLHUfXY1U&m=2jqKMv3zAo-ZqlOBIJLdpdOLG2dk18Skla3R7OgVwbk&s=v3FTqCdPhYkkqSG4CFEcQsNtcSW6nZzPOQc85wngH6M&e=> wiki Russ On Feb 18, 2015, at 12:46 PM, Bonnie Westra <westr...@umn.edu<mailto:westr...@umn.edu>> wrote: Using the NLM app for mapping medication data to RxNorm, we developed a set of rules when there was no NDC or Medispan code available for mapping. The bottom line is that when there is missing data, we ended up with a more generic RxNorm codes. When we had sufficient details, we were able to map to a more specific code. Bonnie Bonnie L. Westra, PhD, RN, FAAN, FACMI Associate Professor, University of Minnesota, School of Nursing & Institute for Health Informatics Director, Center for Nursing Informatics Location - WDH 6-155 P - 612-625-4470, Fax - 612-625-7091 email - westr...@umn.edu<mailto:westr...@umn.edu> Mail - WDH 5-140, 308 Harvard St SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455 On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 12:18 PM, Phillip Reeder <phillip.ree...@utsouthwestern.edu<mailto:phillip.ree...@utsouthwestern.edu>> wrote: We have medications in our clarity_medication table that are not as specific as the GPC Medication hierarchy. For example, we have a medication called “ZOLOFT ORAL” This has multiple GCNs associated with it for the 25MG, 50MG, and 100MG versions, and the oral concentrate version. And the current medication mapping code adds the medications under all of the versions. I’m guessing we have this issue because we have been running Epic at UTSW for 10+ years. Do any other GPC epic sites have a similar issue? Thanks, Phillip ________________________________ UT Southwestern Medical Center The future of medicine, today. _______________________________________________ Gpc-dev mailing list Gpc-dev@listserv.kumc.edu<mailto:Gpc-dev@listserv.kumc.edu> http://listserv.kumc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gpc-dev<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__listserv.kumc.edu_mailman_listinfo_gpc-2Ddev&d=AwMF-g&c=NRtzTzKNaCCmhN_9N2YJR-XrNU1huIgYP99yDsEzaJo&r=uOh5Q3hepVRzk8WwKUjG80B3swu7bu8ArEfLHUfXY1U&m=2jqKMv3zAo-ZqlOBIJLdpdOLG2dk18Skla3R7OgVwbk&s=blNlbU7aArThx2XxUD4_7_HaW1t7h1GUZX5IMb5gCBc&e=> _______________________________________________ Gpc-dev mailing list Gpc-dev@listserv.kumc.edu<mailto:Gpc-dev@listserv.kumc.edu> http://listserv.kumc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gpc-dev Russ Waitman, PhD Director of Medical Informatics Assistant Vice Chancellor for Enterprise Analytics Associate Professor, Department of Internal Medicine University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas 913-945-7087 (office) rwait...@kumc.edu<mailto:rwait...@kumc.edu> http://www.kumc.edu/ea-mi/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.kumc.edu_ea-2Dmi_&d=AwMF-g&c=NRtzTzKNaCCmhN_9N2YJR-XrNU1huIgYP99yDsEzaJo&r=uOh5Q3hepVRzk8WwKUjG80B3swu7bu8ArEfLHUfXY1U&m=2jqKMv3zAo-ZqlOBIJLdpdOLG2dk18Skla3R7OgVwbk&s=6F1vBcsFLOmO_hJSinifDBbV_clqMjiRw8cf44Y6tlg&e=> http://informatics.kumc.edu<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__informatics.kumc.edu_&d=AwMF-g&c=NRtzTzKNaCCmhN_9N2YJR-XrNU1huIgYP99yDsEzaJo&r=uOh5Q3hepVRzk8WwKUjG80B3swu7bu8ArEfLHUfXY1U&m=2jqKMv3zAo-ZqlOBIJLdpdOLG2dk18Skla3R7OgVwbk&s=LyksC3QUoEO-qPbhm4cLUX3WhBmxbAmhs77nkMANDMY&e=> http://informatics.gpcnetwork.org<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__informatics.gpcnetwork.org&d=AwMF-g&c=NRtzTzKNaCCmhN_9N2YJR-XrNU1huIgYP99yDsEzaJo&r=uOh5Q3hepVRzk8WwKUjG80B3swu7bu8ArEfLHUfXY1U&m=2jqKMv3zAo-ZqlOBIJLdpdOLG2dk18Skla3R7OgVwbk&s=Odo0Aju_St3JhdDkLmnsVxqMIF6wIR8gCI6Sd0swnek&e=> – a PCORNet collaborative CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This message and any included attachments are from Cerner Corporation and are intended only for the addressee. The information contained in this message is confidential and may constitute inside or non-public information under international, federal, or state securities laws. Unauthorized forwarding, printing, copying, distribution, or use of such information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the addressee, please promptly delete this message and notify the sender of the delivery error by e-mail or you may call Cerner's corporate offices in Kansas City, Missouri, U.S.A at (+1) (816)221-1024.
_______________________________________________ Gpc-dev mailing list Gpc-dev@listserv.kumc.edu http://listserv.kumc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gpc-dev
