I understand now your concerns about the volume of facts, although I think that the issue is minor from the standpoint of volume of data. I was asking for discussion whether within GPC we would be rolling out the additional datatypes in SNOW SHRINE that would be additions to Jeff's modifiers, not replacing them and I did not hear a consensus on whether we wanted to do so. To be clear, below we have core SCILHS medication modifiers which I assume we are all commiting:
\PCORI_MOD\RX_BASIS\ \PCORI_MOD\RX_BASIS\DI\ \PCORI_MOD\RX_BASIS\PR\ \PCORI_MOD\RX_BASIS\01\ \PCORI_MOD\RX_BASIS\02\ \PCORI_MOD\RX_QUANTITY\ \PCORI_MOD\RX_REFILLS\ \PCORI_MOD\RX_FREQUENCY\...(12 MODIFIERS) \PCORI_MOD\DAYS_SUPPLY\ \PCORI_MOD\ I propose supporting inpatient and outpatient dispensing events \PCORI_MOD\RX_BASIS\DI\INPT\ \PCORI_MOD\RX_BASIS\DI\OUTPT\ But these are optional if dispensing events are deployed as a modifier folder and a site can choose to ignore the distinction and we can still query for aggregate dispense events across SNOW SHRINE I pointed out that CDMV3 supports med administration events in PROCEDURES and asked if we would agree on adding administration events but got no answer, so it appears right now that GPC has no commitment and I would consider these optional although UNMC will be supporting them: \PCORI_MOD\RX_BASIS\AD\ \PCORI_MOD\RX_BASIS\AD\OUTPT\ \PCORI_MOD\RX_BASIS\AD\INPT\ Finally, I am not hearing interest from other GPC sites, and so UNMC will be rolling out facts on order detail as our optional extension to SCILHS for local consumption: \PCORI_MOD\RX_STRENGTH\Ordered strength \PCORI_MOD\RX_ROUTE\Ordered route \PCORI_MOD\RX_DOSE\Ordered dose \PCORI_MOD\RX_DETAIL\Ordered detail(SIG) Jim Campbell -----Original Message----- From: Debbie Yoshihara [mailto:dlyos...@wisc.edu] Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 10:56 AM To: Dan Connolly <dconno...@kumc.edu>; gpc-dev@listserv.kumc.edu; Thomas Mish <m...@wisc.edu>; Campbell, James R <campb...@unmc.edu>; huhick...@nebraskamed.com; Russ Waitman <rwait...@kumc.edu> Cc: jeff.kl...@mgh.harvard.edu Subject: RE: [gpc-informatics] #280: Medication ontology orgainzed by ingredient Ok, here is how I count 11 1) RX_BASIS DI 2) RX_BASIS PR 3) RX_BASIS AD 4) RX_DAYS_SUPPLY 5) RX_FREQ 6) RX_QUANTITY 7) RX_REFILLS 8) RX_STRENGTH 9) RX_ROUTE 10) RX_DOSE 11) RX_DETAIL I guess you're counting the RX_BASIS as 1 instead of 3. --- Debbie Yoshihara -----Original Message----- From: Dan Connolly [mailto:dconno...@kumc.edu] Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 10:38 AM To: Debbie Yoshihara; gpc-dev@listserv.kumc.edu; Thomas Mish; campb...@unmc.edu; huhick...@nebraskamed.com; Russ Waitman Cc: jeff.kl...@mgh.harvard.edu Subject: RE: [gpc-informatics] #280: Medication ontology orgainzed by ingredient As to who is going to look at them: i2p-transform (i.e. software to build PCORNet CDM from i2b2) consumes these modifiers. As to 11x: how many modifiers are you currently storing? You're already storing RX_BASIS, RX_FREQUENCY, RX_DAYS_SUPPLY, RX_QUANTITY, and RX_REFILLS somehow, yes? UNMC was proposing adding RX_STRENGTH, RX_ROUSE, RX_DOSE, and RX_SIG, but in discussion it emerged that "justification for including route, dose and detail modifiers ... is weakest in terms of use cases" I count 9 total modifiers in the proposal, 5 of which KUMC (and presumably the other 8 sites using the i2p-transform code) are already loading, and 3 of which could (from discussion so far) be removed without much objection. So to me, it looks like this is a proposal to go from 5 to 6 modifiers. -- Dan ________________________________________ From: Debbie Yoshihara [dlyos...@wisc.edu] Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 10:09 AM To: gpc-dev@listserv.kumc.edu; Thomas Mish; campb...@unmc.edu; huhick...@nebraskamed.com; Dan Connolly; Russ Waitman Cc: jeff.kl...@mgh.harvard.edu Subject: RE: [gpc-informatics] #280: Medication ontology orgainzed by ingredient I have looked over these explosion of modifiers. For the med modifiers if you populated all of them that would make the facts 11x bigger for the med facts. Who is going to look at all of these? Or even populate them if they have them? The only other question I have is for the lab_mod, what is the difference between stat and expedite? --- Debbie Yoshihara -----Original Message----- From: Gpc-dev [mailto:gpc-dev-boun...@listserv.kumc.edu] On Behalf Of GPC Informatics Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 8:46 AM To: Thomas Mish; campb...@unmc.edu; huhick...@nebraskamed.com; dconno...@kumc.edu; rwait...@kumc.edu Cc: gpc-dev@listserv.kumc.edu; jeff.kl...@mgh.harvard.edu Subject: Re: [gpc-informatics] #280: Medication ontology orgainzed by ingredient #280: Medication ontology orgainzed by ingredient -------------------------+---------------------------- Reporter: preeder | Owner: mish Type: enhancement | Status: assigned Priority: major | Milestone: snow-shrine-2 Component: data-stds | Resolution: Keywords: | Blocked By: Blocking: | -------------------------+---------------------------- Changes (by dconnolly): * owner: jay.pedersen => mish Comment: Tom, Is Debbie likely to complete her review this morning? -- Ticket URL: <http://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/ticket/280#comment:17> 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 The information in this e-mail may be privileged and confidential, intended only for the use of the addressee(s) above. Any unauthorized use or disclosure of this information is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail by mistake, please delete it and immediately contact the sender. _______________________________________________ Gpc-dev mailing list Gpc-dev@listserv.kumc.edu http://listserv.kumc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gpc-dev
