I was checking again with the multiple simultaneous terminology mapping on one text item.
TERM_MAPPINGS could do, but the archetype-editor, nor the ocean, nor the linkehr support it. The template-editor does not support it well. This makes it unmaintainable for the company I work. I could hack it in the datasets, but I am only on temporary base here, that is why this It seems that other have similar problems, and I think a revise of the RM is necessary. Multiple defining_codes on one DV_CODED_TEXT does not break existing datasets or archetypes. And to support the non-code-hackers, a new check on the tooling (regarding to term-mapping) will be necessary, even to support the existing RM features. Bert Op zo 19 mrt. 2017 om 23:35 schreef Heath Frankel < heath.fran...@oceanhealthsystems.com>: > See SPECPR-132 and proposed solution in SPECPR-165 which is designed to > not break the current schema. They appear to be assigned to R1.1 but not > progressed to a CR. > > > > Heath > > > > *From:* Heath Frankel > *Sent:* Thursday, 16 March 2017 10:52 PM > > > *To:* For openEHR clinical discussions <openehr-clinical@lists.openehr.org > > > > *Subject:* RE: Problem with constraint_binding > > > > Perhaps I have come in at the wrong point of the conversation and missed > the original question but I believe that the SEC has already approved a > change (or at least got a change proposal from me, I’ll need to follow up > to find the Jira card) to add a value to the mappings code phrase. Is this > a solution to your issue? > > > > Heath > > > > *From:* openEHR-clinical [ > mailto:openehr-clinical-boun...@lists.openehr.org > <openehr-clinical-boun...@lists.openehr.org>] *On Behalf Of *Bert Verhees > *Sent:* Thursday, 16 March 2017 8:31 AM > *To:* For openEHR clinical discussions <openehr-clinical@lists.openehr.org > > > *Subject:* Re: Problem with constraint_binding > > > > We are considering that Diego, the fact is that the customer wishes to > code the name -item two times. Both coding - systems are not easy to map > and the mapping cannot be calculated easily by software. > > > > So we need two Dv_coded_text's to carry the codes, and only one value to > carry the name. > > > > The problem with to Dv_coded_text's is however that it offers two value - > fields and that is not what we want. > > > > It is a pity that a Dv_coded_text only can carry one code. I don't > understand that restriction but we cannot solve that now, I hope this can > be considered in a RM change. > > > > So I think, we will have two Dv_coded_text's and from one having the value > put of in a template if that is possible. I look into that tomorrow. > > > > Best regards > > Bert > > Op wo 15 mrt. 2017 12:20 schreef Diego Boscá <yamp...@gmail.com>: > > What about having two sibling DV_CODED_TEXT nodes as alternatives on the > parent? (or specialize two different ones from the single parent one). That > would allow to arbitrarily define constraint binding as needed, and in data > only one would be correct one > > > > 2017-03-15 12:13 GMT+01:00 Ian McNicoll <i...@freshehr.com>: > > Hi Bert > > This is correct. If you were to add those constraints in a specialised > archetype, at run-time the submitted term in the defining_code attribute > would have to come from one of the two terminologies specified. > > The constraint can define multiple potential terminologies but only one > defining_code is allowed in the instance data. > > Ian > > On Wed, 15 Mar 2017 at 10:29, Bert Verhees <bert.verh...@rosa.nl> wrote: > > Dear readers, > > > > I have a problem and I want to ask your advise. > > > > The problem is that I want to > use openEHR-EHR-EVALUATION.problem_diagnosis.v1 which is in CKM. > > > > In that archetype is the item "Problem/Diagnosis name", which is of type > DV_TEXT. We want to use it as DV_CODED_TEXT, because we want to add code to > the entered name. > > > > In this situation where I work, the customer wants to use 2 different > codes, one company crerated internal codelist, and ICD10. > > > > It seems easy to arrange in the archetype, I think I need to specialize > it, because I want to add the constraint-bindings to give room for the > codes. The archetype-editor from Ocean allows two constraint-bindings on > the same node, like displayed below. But this seems wrong to me. > > > > In the reference model in the DV_CODED_TEXT is one CODE_PHRASE (1..1). And > CODE_PHRASE has terminology_id and code_string also 1..1 > > > > So how will the construct below be interpreted following the specs? > > > > constraint_bindings = < > > ["ETDA"] = < > > items = < > > ["ac0001"] = <terminology:ETDA> > > > > > > > > ["ICD10"] = < > > items = < > > ["ac0001"] = <terminology:ICD10> > > > > > > > > > > > > > My second question, if you say this is impossible to add two terminology > constraints to one data-item, which construct do you advise to make two > terminology constraints_bindings available to one DV_CODED_TEXT (or maybe > another datavalue-type)? > > > > Thanks for any help. > > > > Best regards > > Bert Verhees > > > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-clinical mailing list > openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org > > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org > > -- > > Ian McNicoll > > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-clinical mailing list > openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org > > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org > > > > -- > > [image: VeraTech for Health SL] <https://htmlsig.com/t/000001C268PZ> > > [image: Twitter] <https://htmlsig.com/t/000001C47QQH> [image: LinkedIn] > <https://htmlsig.com/t/000001C4DPJG> [image: Maps] > <https://htmlsig.com/t/000001BZTWS7> > > *Diego Boscá Tomás* / Senior developer > diebo...@veratech.es > yamp...@gmail.com > > *VeraTech for Health SL* > +34 961071863 <+34%20961%2007%2018%2063> / +34 627015023 > <+34%20627%2001%2050%2023> > www.veratech.es > > Su dirección de correo electrónico junto a sus datos personales forman > parte de un fichero titularidad de VeraTech for Health SL (CIF B98309511) > cuya finalidad es la de mantener el contacto con usted. Conforme a La Ley > Orgánica 15/1999, usted puede ejercitar sus derechos de acceso, > rectificación, cancelación y, en su caso oposición, enviando una solicitud > por escrito a verat...@veratech.es. > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-clinical mailing list > openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org > > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-clinical mailing list > openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org > > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org
_______________________________________________ openEHR-clinical mailing list openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org
