If your Epic is like our Epic …
RESULT_DATE is in table ORDER_RESULT, the nastily abbreviated
SPECIMN_TAKEN_DATE (and SPECIMN_TAKEN_TIME) are in ORDER_PROC_2, and
ORDERING_DATE is in ORDER_PROC, the needed joins are on the shared
ORDER_PROC_ID across the three tables.
--
Alex
On 1/25/17, 12:45 PM, "Dan Connolly" <dconno...@kumc.edu> wrote:
I started looking at date differences... for similar reasons to the ones
Alex gave, I thought a histogram was in order... I had assumed the specimen
date and order date were in the same table as the result date. But I don't see
them. I don't know where they are.
My earlier 1 to 2 month estimate for revising HERON ETL was based on this
assumption. I no longer have a clear design in my head, so multiply my estimate
by 2x to 3x until I know more.
--
Dan
________________________________________
From: Gpc-dev [gpc-dev-boun...@listserv.kumc.edu] on behalf of Stoddard,
Alexander [astodd...@mcw.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 11:41 AM
To: gpc-dev@listserv.kumc.edu
Subject: Re: [gpc-informatics] #551: next-D labs for cohort selection
I’ll return the Excel spreadsheet survey with info for MCW outside of the
dev list.
MCW uses RESULT_DATE for the i2b2 “START_DATE” for lab facts. START_DATE
being a very poor name imposed by the i2b2 schema, it’s really just “some date”
for a fact without any explicit context – hence the difference choices we will
find between sites. It is also the “only date” that can be used to ask time
relative questions of any given set of facts in i2b2 unless we start creating
related concepts or being inventive with modifier codes. I know of no example
of i2b2 modifier codes modifying the _date_ of a fact as opposed to the
_value_. I think the schema would support it in principle but I have no idea if
the client and generated queries would. This would also be a long term major
ETL development task.
We do have all three of order_date, specimen_date and result_date from our
Epic source data. But specimen date is only partially available, we are at the
mercy of manual data entry and data validation upstream of us in the system.
That is, at least in part, why MCW made the expedient choice of making
RESULT_DATE our anchor for lab facts, it was the “best” one that was
consistently available in the large.
Are the max difference questions for the different date types to be
answered in the limited context of only to A1C values, or all lab results in
our source system (or some broader subset)?
I fear a simple max difference is going to be non-robust, uninformative,
and look very bad (or even nonsensical) for us. Some work flows upstream (at
least at MCW) for entering lab results into the EHR use manual data
abstraction, and others use (at times broken) automated abstraction with poorly
mapped date field semantics. There is going to be some percentage of completely
bogus date values. To truly assess the lag between the different lab date
semantics will probably take calculating percentiles of the differences for
individual lab tests – this is obviously more effort and we will need guidance
on how soon an answer is needed for it to be useful and if it is worth the
effort and/or worth the wait.
Thank you,
Alex Stoddard
Biomedical Informatics Software Engineer
CTSI
Medical College of Wisconsin
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 08:29:17 -0600
From: "Al'ona Furmanchuk" <furmanc...@icnanotox.org>
To: Dan Connolly <dconno...@kumc.edu>
Cc: Bernard Black <bbl...@kellogg.northwestern.edu>,
"<gpc-dev@listserv.kumc.edu>" <gpc-dev@listserv.kumc.edu>
Subject: Re: [gpc-informatics] #551: next-D labs for cohort selection:
fasting glucose, HbA1c
Message-ID:
<cadevuy6gxhn009napqyucrnjukds1zodzpw6fwyovrk7cy9...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Before we go toward changes, lets just see if we need to. I would
appreciate if each site could fill up attached form and send back to
me. I
filled some sites based on this discussion. Please, check and correct
if I
got it wrong.
Alona.
_______________________________________________
Gpc-dev mailing list
Gpc-dev@listserv.kumc.edu
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__listserv.kumc.edu_mailman_listinfo_gpc-2Ddev&d=DgIF-g&c=aFamLAsxMIDYjNglYHTMV0iqFn3z4pVFYPQkjgspw4Y&r=2S2sV01JpQSOCNBMw3DILaZfXG0t4OvxNkb0zbYJenM&m=sR9l_-zxs5MB7oII2baNWbNqEZvJPnGLAR84yyNlvCg&s=2znggALNjewkgzsqzHPt6gt3aDsD-4ulwkQgoeqdYtw&e=
_______________________________________________
Gpc-dev mailing list
Gpc-dev@listserv.kumc.edu
http://listserv.kumc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gpc-dev
