Thanks Kerstin,
I am familiar with the CDISC RDF as we aim to reuse it in eTRIKS (where
CDISC and we are a part of) and see how to best linked it to the
LinkedISA work. This will also very much useful for the CEDAR centre.
More off list to avoid spanning all.
Thanks,
Susanna
On 21/09/2014 13:46, Kerstin Forsberg wrote:
Hi and Many Thanks Susanna for your email
The coverage for CRL was metadata describing prospective clinical data
standards, both public such as CDISC and internal such as raw data
standards for a specific clinical project, as well as descriptions of
retrospectiive datasets.The projejct was stopped a couple of years
ago. For many reasons, one was the lack of an people in the clinical
trial domain with an engineering approach to data standards and also
challanges in the creating a user interface to support complex
configuration management.
I'm actively engaged in several other ISO11179 related intitatives:
The IMI EHR4CR project has build a data element editor. And in the
FDA/PhUSE Semantic Technology project we've create a small metamodel
schema for data elements to represent all CDISC standards as is in RDF
https://github.com/phuse-org/rdf.cdisc.org . And there's is a Data
Element Exchange (DEX) IHE profile
http://wiki.ihe.net/index.php?title=Data_Element_Exchange intative
I'm also trying to keep an eye on the RDF Shape dsicussions as the
topic of representing value sets seems, IMHO, to be a shared issue
across CDISC, HL7 and others, see
http://kerfors.blogspot.se/2013/10/the-future-of-cdisc-cts.html
I think the versions/variants problem is a common issue, not yet
addressed, across all of these, Hence my response to Andrea's eamil
I would like to learn more about RDA's and related intitatives related
to this. I'll catch up on the material you linked to.
Thanks
Kerstin
I'm just now follwoing you and the others on the nice #RDAplenary tag
on Twitter :-)
2014-09-21 13:30 GMT+02:00 Susanna Sansone <sa.sans...@gmail.com
<mailto:sa.sans...@gmail.com>>:
Hi Kerstin,
/(sl//ightly diverging from the subject of this tread)/
I am not sure which data standards will you cover in the registry
and wonder if there is a opportunity for collaboration. You may be
familiar with http://www.biosharing.org/ where registering
data/metadata reporting standards is core; this work is embedded
both into elixir activities, IMI eTRIKS, the new NIH CEDAR centre
and RDA (we have a working group with publishers, see:
https://rd-alliance.org/sites/default/files/case_statement/BioSharing_RDA_WG_case_satement_submitted_8Aug2014.pdf)
to help stakeholders to make informed decisions on coverage, use
and popularity of these reporting standards. Want you may need
could be complementary to what we do/aim to do, but happy to
discuss options for collaborations.
Thanks,
Susanna
On 21/09/2014 12:49, Kerstin Forsberg wrote:
Hi Andrea,
in an earlier attempt to design and launch a Metadata Registry
for clinical trial data, called Clinical Reference Library1 ). To
capture and manage descriptions of versions of clinical trial
data standards, and of variants of actual clinical trial
datasets, we applied the software pattern called Facade 2). We
used it to manage variants of metadata items on different
gramualrity (e.g. data element, value domain, datasets) within a
shared facade. It required a strong configuration management
approach and hence an standard enginering approach similar as to
software engineering.
Cheers
Kerstin
1)
http://www.slideshare.net/kerfors/designing-and-launching-the-clinical-reference-library
(slide 2 highlights the Realities of clinical trials data: the
variances, changes, diversities and gaps)
2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facade_pattern
2014-09-21 12:21 GMT+02:00 Andrea Splendiani
<andrea.splendi...@iscb.org <mailto:andrea.splendi...@iscb.org>>:
Hi,
I may re-use some bits of it, but overall I am dealing with
quite a different thing.
I don't have "publications", I have evolving information
sets. Provenance/evidence and the like are there, but not so
fine-grained (e.g.: I may have the whole ontology with the
same provenance/evidence, not a few statement). In same case
(small subset) I have some more fine-grained information. In
this case I may pickup something from nanopubs, though I have
a string focus on capturing evolution of knowledge rather
than "facts" (e.g.: some facts gets validated).
There is also an are I don't know how to fit in, from the
nanopubs point of view, because facts come with a history of
discussion behind.
Another aspect that I think it's different is, whatever I
have, it's id centric, and entity centric in the specific
(like a dictionary).
So identifiers (and the relations between identifiers and
identifiers of versions) comes first.
best,
Andrea
Il giorno 19/set/2014, alle ore 20:07, Michel Dumontier
<michel.dumont...@gmail.com
<mailto:michel.dumont...@gmail.com>> ha scritto:
> Hi,
> I suggest nanopublications to track versioning for assertions
> http://www.nanopub.org/guidelines/
>
> m.
>
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Joachim Baran
<joachim.ba...@gmail.com <mailto:joachim.ba...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> On 19 September 2014 09:45, Andrea Splendiani
<andrea.splendi...@iscb.org <mailto:andrea.splendi...@iscb.org>>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> When a concept change meaning, it changes id ;)
>>
>> Aha! I think it might not always change ID! ;)
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Kim
--
Susanna-Assunta Sansone, PhD
uk.linkedin.com/in/sasansone <http://uk.linkedin.com/in/sasansone>
University of Oxford e-Research Centre
Associate Director and PI
isacommons.org <http://isacommons.org> |biosharing.org
<http://biosharing.org>
Nature Publishing Group
Consultant, Scientific Data
nature.com/scientificdata <http://nature.com/scientificdata>
--
--
Susanna-Assunta Sansone, PhD
uk.linkedin.com/in/sasansone
University of Oxford e-Research Centre
Associate Director and PI
isacommons.org | biosharing.org
Nature Publishing Group
Consultant, Scientific Data
nature.com/scientificdata
--
