Dear Hugh, That sounds very interesting - I am wondering how you went about with the conversion? Did you have to do a lot manually? Also, did you rely on existing archetypes or did you create your own? I tried to re-use as much as possible of the existing archetypes, but found this task very tedious since archetypes had to be searched manually to see if they contained the concepts/fields that I needed or were structured in a way that was useful to me. How did you deal with that?
Are those archetypes you created available publicly? Finally, how did you decide on how to structure certain compositions in your center? Again, did you rely on existing sources or did you make them up yourself? Regards, Melanie. On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 3:18 AM, Hugh Leslie < hugh.leslie at oceaninformatics.com> wrote: > Hi Melanie > > We have also just completed a project for an Australian cancer epidemiology > center where we converted all their 20 years of data to openEHR - about 1.5 > million compositions and 25GB of data. To do this we had to do a lot of > modeling (although in the end, they did most of that themselves) and that > experience and some of the archetypes that came out of it might be of > interest to you. They are now doing poplulation queries across the whole > dataset using AQL. Very exciting! > > regards Hugh > > > On 11/11/2009 9:51 PM, Melanie Spath wrote: > > Hi all, > > Thanks for the great advice, it is very helpful. > > I am actually aiming at developing "research" or "omic" archetypes (e.g. > test results from experiments on patient specimen, e.g. from > genomic/proteomic/metabolomic experiments etc.), since my background is in > genetics. The reason for this is to be able to integrate clinical patient > and scientific research data to support biomedical knowledge discovery. In > this, I am collaborating with a prostate cancer bio-resource which collects > specimen from prostate cancer patients. A biobank contains clinical patient > information and the "omic" information. I am planning to use this biobank as > a test-bed for an "archetyped" biobank information system. > > As a start I was trying to see how much of the clinical content in the > biobank could be modelled with existing archetypes (to avoid duplicate > effort) and to discover "holes". Some of the information could be modelled > with existing archetypes (e.g. results of histopathological analysis with > the openEHR-EHR-CLUSTER.microscopy_prostate_carcinoma.v1 archetype), but for > others I could not find suitable archetypes (this in itself was not an easy > task, I think there needs to be another discussion on a different > thread/list about the difficulties of matching database fields to existing > archetypes/fields in existing archetypes). I wasn't sure if the > non-existence of archetypes for radio/hormone/chemotherapy was because they > hadn't been developed yet or because it was envisaged that other existing > archetypes could be used to model these (e.g. the INSTRUCTION.medication and > INSTRUCTION.non_drug_therapy ones). > > Until then, in the presence of these "holes", my approach will be to use > "placeholder" archetypes that hold the minimum needed information for this > specific case e.g. for radio/hormone/chemotherapy as discussed above, until > experts have agreed on their general suitable structure. I am welcoming any > developments in this area. > > Thank you for your help. > > Best regards, > Melanie. > > > > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 1:16 AM, Heather Leslie < > heather.leslie at oceaninformatics.com> wrote: > >> Hi Melanie, >> >> I see some great comments from Ian and Kevin so far - thanks. >> >> You aren't starting with anything simple ;-) - this is a very complicated >> domain and hopefully you will have access to some oncological advice and >> resources as well. >> >> The Medication archetype is a great starting point. Please be aware that >> we are doing some work at the moment to try to bring the Medication family - >> Instruction, Action and the common description up for collaborative review >> in CKM soon. We are trying to harmonise the current archetype with many >> requirements and standards so that we can try to streamline the review >> process, but I expect that we will find it to be one of our harder >> archetypes to get agreement on. Keep an eye out, and adopt the archetypes if >> you would like to participate in the review when initiated. >> >> Intravenous orders and administration of drugs adds a further degree of >> complexity, and most of your chemo will likely be needing this extra >> functionality. Plus some of these chemo instructions will be complex >> orders, potentially with a number of activities within the one order. Some >> routes may be atypical eg intrathecal etc. >> >> Hormone therapy - hmm trying to remember back... Certainly many will be >> simple oral medication instructions/actions; some will be IV (as above). We >> need some expert advice here to determine if there are additional >> requirements for some hormone therapy that exceed these identified use >> cases. >> >> Radiotherapy is a completely separate area, and as Kevin/Ian suggest, you >> need to determine the scope here - potentially it is a whole domain of >> medicine! I would suggest you mindmap your requirements for recording as a >> starting point, and from there you should be able to identify the potential >> archetypes that need development - it may be more than one >> instruction/action eg related measurements etc requiring recording in an >> Observation archetype. >> >> regards >> >> Heather >> >> >> On 11/11/2009 2:44 AM, Melanie Spath wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I'm trying to archetype patient records in a prostate cancer >> environment. I see that there are currently no specific archetypes for >> common cancer treatments such as radiotherapy, hormone therapy and >> chemotherapy. Could hormone therapy and chemotherapy be described as >> specializations of the openEHR-EHR-INSTRUCTION.medication.v1 >> archetype? And could radiotherapy be described with a specialization >> of openEHR-EHR-INSTRUCTION.non_ >> drug_therapy.v1? Or should these be >> described in completely new archetypes (e.g. INSTRUCTION.radiotherapy/ >> hormone_therapy/chemotherapy)? >> >> Thanks for your help, >> Melanie Spath. >> >> PhD Candidate >> >> Centre for Health Informatics >> School of Computer Science & Statistics >> Trinity College Dublin >> Dublin 2, Ireland >> _______________________________________________ >> openEHR-clinical mailing list >> openEHR-clinical at >> openehr.orghttp://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical >> >> >> >> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature >> database 4593 (20091110) __________ >> >> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. >> http://www.eset.com >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> *Dr Heather Leslie* >> MBBS FRACGP FACHI >> Director of Clinical Modelling >> *Ocean Informatics <http://www.oceaninformatics.com/>* >> Phone (Aust) +61 (0)418 966 670 >> Skype - heatherleslie >> Twitter - @omowizard >> >> _______________________________________________ >> openEHR-clinical mailing list >> openEHR-clinical at openehr.org >> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical >> > > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-clinical mailing listopenEHR-clinical at > openehr.orghttp://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical > > > -- > > ________________________________________________ > Dr Hugh Leslie MBBS, Dip. Obs. RACOG, FRACGP, FACHI > Clinical Director > Ocean Informatics Pty Ltd > M: +61 404 033 767 E: hugh.leslie at oceaninformatics.com W: > www.oceaninformatics.com > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-clinical mailing list > openEHR-clinical at openehr.org > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20091112/6aaec560/attachment.html>
