Tim
Snomed is seen as the content - LOINC as the tag - clearly there can be
overlap. SNOMED is starting to incorporate LOINC and are not duplicating the
work (Senior Exec 8/11/00).
There are many examples when the distinction is not clear - say we have a
term "FBC" with a synonym "Full Blood Examination". When ordering this will
be content - when receiving results this may be a tag. Likewise for
Haemaglobin, Cholesterol ...etc.
LOINC have started to develop clinical tags as well. The idea is to
standardise the tags used in HL7 messages - but it is growing into something
very big. A health record architecture can relieve some of the complexity in
terms - which otherwise have to grow to enormous lists to cope with every
single test type - including if there was a challenge etc.
Cheers, Sam
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Benson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2000 8:52 PM
Subject: RE: A Proposal
> Interesting idea. But, semantics is always tougher than syntax. I have
not
> looked at LOINC for some time, but if I remember right it started off
being
> focused on clinical laboratories. To what extent has that changed?
>
> One other terminology system that we cannot ignore is the CAP's upcoming
> SNOMED CT. What are the advantages of LOINC against the SNOMED CT?
SNOMED
> CT will be free in Britain as it is funded in part by the NHS.
>
> At the lower level of interoperability, you might like to have a look at
the
> UK Government's new Framework for Interoperability e-GIF, which mandates
use
> of XML Schemas, RDF, UML etc for syntax.
>
> Tim Benson
> Abies e-Health
> 12 St Georges Road, London, NW11 0LR
> 020 8455 8106; 07768 825 012 (mob); 020 8458 9577 (fax)
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Alvin B. Marcelo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: 17 November 2000 22:53
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: A Proposal
> >
> >
> > I would like to make a proposal to the alliance:
> >
> >
>
>
