I admit I have only looked at lab in detail, but it is missing ~60 rows added 
in 3.1. Also the “zz Version” row says 2.1. I notice medications also says 2.1.

My mistake, on a closer look I see you have included the modifiers in our 
trees. The import tool I was using set m_exclusion_cd to the empty string 
instead of null, which was breaking it. I’ll make a note in my issues list that 
you might want to add a warning about this to any README / documentation you 
have.

The more philosophical question is whether your new trees should also have the 
modifiers. I’d suggest so, for the relevant ones, and it would be easy to do by 
just changing the applied_path and add an exclusion code (for the parent 
folder) to the existing modifiers. This would make them fully compatible with 
our PCORnet transform. On the other hand, I agree they are used inconsistently 
and infrequently, so if that’s a lower priority we can work with that.

… As an aside, one of our sites just informed me ICD-10 added a ton of new 
diagnosis codes in the newest release. Are you / are you interested in 
maintaining that tree as well? My (perhaps mistaken) understanding is that the 
ICD-10 tree is quite standardized so we wouldn’t run into the implementation 
differences we saw in Labs and Meds…

Thanks!
Jeff

Jeffrey Klann, PhD
Instructor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School
Director, SCILHS Query Core

From: "Campbell, James R" <campb...@unmc.edu>
Date: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 at 8:59 AM
To: Jeffrey KLANN <jeff.kl...@mgh.harvard.edu>, Shawn MURPHY 
<snmur...@partners.org>
Cc: "Campbell, Walter S" <wcamp...@unmc.edu>, "Pedersen, Jay G" 
<jay.peder...@unmc.edu>, "Narayana, Yeshwanth R" <yeshwanth.naray...@unmc.edu>, 
"Estiri, Hossein" <hest...@mgh.harvard.edu>, Matthew JOSS <mj...@partners.org>, 
GPC STANDARDS <gpc-dev@listserv.kumc.edu>
Subject: Re: SNOW SHRINE metadata


Jeff

We definitely sought out and used 3.1b as root; why do you say version 2?



There is virtually no agreement on the use of your modifiers in GPC and some 
sites recommend stripping them from the release.  We, for one, do not use the 
structures you imply in OBSERVATION_FACT deployment in order to populate 
CDMV3.1-4.  I am torn as to how we treat them in publication.



At the request of Medical College of Wisconsin, we added 80 or so labs to our 
ontology and Yesh is just now deploying to our release site so check with him 
and he will assure we have our 20180330 release.

Jim

________________________________
From: Klann, Jeffrey G. <jeff.kl...@mgh.harvard.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, April 3, 2018 8:16 PM
To: Campbell, James R; Murphy, Shawn N.
Cc: Campbell, Walter S; Pedersen, Jay G; Narayana, Yeshwanth R; Estiri, 
Hossein; Joss, Matthew A. H.
Subject: Re: SNOW SHRINE metadata

Non-UNMC email




This is great!



I’m making a list of detailed suggestions that will need to be addressed before 
it can be used in production in ARCH, but the content looks really good. I’ll 
put my issues in a Google Doc and share it with all of you. I’m going to try to 
get your new labs table running at our Partners ARCH site and if that works 
we’ll deploy it in the network!



My major suggestion is about your distribution. I really like how you’re making 
it backward compatible with our ontology by only appending to it. I’d suggest 
that you use that approach and distribute your work only as patches / add-ons 
to our ontology, at least until ours is finished being developed, instead of 
releasing a full table version, for a couple reasons. One, we will be changing 
the core ontology (but not the terminology trees) to support CDM v4 in the 
coming months and it would make versioning difficult for you to maintain 
something sync’ed with ours. Also, you seem to have forked from v2, not 3.1b. 
Finally, your version breaks the modifiers. If you release as patches you avoid 
having to keep track of all this. If we decide to stop developing the ontology 
at the end of 2018 we could revisit this. What do you think?



You may certainly reference our work in publication. Your current 
acknowledgement is fine (except that you spelled Harvard wrong <g>) but please 
add a link to our GitHub (https://github.com/ARCH-commons/arch-ontology) so 
folks can see the development history. Also it is released under the i2b2 
license so my understanding is that yours must be also, or something compatible.



Thanks!

Jeff



Jeffrey Klann, PhD

Instructor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School

Director, SCILHS Query Core



From: "Campbell, James R" <campb...@unmc.edu>
Date: Saturday, March 31, 2018 at 1:34 PM
To: Jeffrey KLANN <jeff.kl...@mgh.harvard.edu>, Shawn MURPHY 
<snmur...@partners.org>
Cc: "Campbell, Walter S" <wcamp...@unmc.edu>, "Pedersen, Jay G" 
<jay.peder...@unmc.edu>, "Narayana, Yeshwanth R" <yeshwanth.naray...@unmc.edu>
Subject: SNOW SHRINE metadata



Jeff

Shawn

We have completed our build of SNOW SHRINE_20180331 i2b2 metadata and plan to 
publish this with strict versioning control  on our website.  
(https://www.unmc.edu/pathology/informatics/tdc) I enclose a mock-up of our 
download page which will require the user to have  a UMLS account to obtain the 
material.  Based upon our last discussion, we have obtained SCILHS 3.1b and 
expanded your metadata as follows:



1) Laboratory has a new expanded LOINC concept set with common panel codes and 
about 1500 commonly used lab tests

2) Medications has appended a comprehensive (all historical RXNORM and NDC 
code) metadata set indexed by ingredient and organized alphabetically.  The VA 
schema you built remains and we have agreement with NLM that we can count on 
support for VA Therapeutic and Physiologic classification going forward even 
though NDF-RT is defunct.

3) Diagnoses with addition of SNOMED CT conditions/problems



We will be publishing both FULL and DELTA releases six monthly with updates for 
all ONC terminologies and will probably have a FIXES release in a few months 
with some additional lab requests.



I want to ask your permission to reference your work in publication and ask 
what you would like for acknowledgement on the download page?

Jim

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.

The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is
addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mail
contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance HelpLine at
http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in error
but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and properly
dispose of the e-mail.

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

Reply via email to