Age and named quantities

[USM Bish]

On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 04:03:04PM +, Thomas Beale wrote:
>
[some snipped]
>
> I would like  to discourage people from using raw  XML in posts
> meant  for  humans to  read  (i.e.  any  post). XML  is  pretty
> unreadable at the best of times,  and usually obscures the data
> with the tags.
>

Valid point. Even worse, when using  a HTML mailer, where white
space  formatting in  mails from  vanilla text  mailers may  be
'chomped' and the indenting also goes ...

> A better  way of presenting data  is just indented  attribute =
> value form (effectively textual UML instance form)

Accepted. UML would be the defacto for me (in future) ...

Cheers

Dr USM Bish
Bangalore
-
If you have any questions about using this list,
please send a message to d.lloyd at openehr.org

Age and named quantities

[USM Bish]

On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 08:00:39AM +0930, Sam Heard wrote:
> 
> Age is time after birth - we are not going to change that.
>

That's fine ... now for the second ...

> We have agreed that we need to record one more date in the demographic 
> model - which is 'approximate date of conception', or 'expected date of 
> birth'

We should  confine ourselves with available  recommendations of
the WHO, which  is based on LMP only. All  other parameters are
derived from this. Besides, LMP is a fixed recordable event.

>From the  XML, I understand,  you may  be thinking in  terms of
some gestational history  for the newborn. Calculations  can be
done from  the mother's  obstretic history,  as per  parameters
defined by the WHO. This is the current recommendations:

o LMP = first day of the Last Menstrual Period
o Prematurity  = birth < (LMP + 37 wk) gestation
o Normal gestation = birth > (LMP + 38 wk) < (LMP + 41 wk)
o Postmaturity = birth > (LMP + 42 wk) gestation

Please note the hazy zones between 37-38th week and 41-42nd wk.
We can expand the band of normalcy from 37 to 42, and eliminate
this vagueness without significant real-life issues.

Date of Conception is normally not used because it depends upon
the periodicity of the menstural cycle of the mother and  other
factors. The variations are too many to be correctly instituted
as a measure.

If you are thinking of an additional  DV_Textual_ordered  class
as seen from the XML (quoted below) then:

> 
>   "Birth"
>   
>   0
>   "days"
>   
> 
>

o The 'magnitude' would obviously have to be taken from the EDD
  (Expected Date of Delivery). Since the  'normal range' itself
  is a wide band, with the midian point at (LMP + 274 days) the  
  above representation would have to be re-structured.

o Incidentally, there is also an alternate 'prematurity' defini-
  tion based on weight - the original WHO recommendation of 1948
  (viz birth weight < 2500 gm). This covers the "small-for-date"
  newborns, burn within normal gestation period. This  is  still
  in use in several countries (mainly developing countries).This
  should not be ignored.

o Postmaturity is another factor which would  need  inclusion in
  such a textual class. To keep it simple and  self explanatory,
  I suppose, the following should do:

  
  "Gestation_period"
  
  0
  "weeks"
  
  

  
  "Birth_weight"
  
  0
  "grams"
  
  

Keeping the gestational period kept as an absolute number leaves
things like  normal range,  prematurity,  postmaturity etc  as a
search/ derived parameter. Any changes in WHO criteria would not
affect the database.

Just a suggestion ...

Dr USM Bish
Bangalore

-
If you have any questions about using this list,
please send a message to d.lloyd at openehr.org

Age and named quantities

[Thomas Beale]

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

Age and named quantities

[Gerard Freriks]

Sam,

You mean the 'age of a person' and not 'age'.

Gerard


--   --
Gerard Freriks, arts
Huigsloterdijk 378
2158 LR Buitenkaag
The Netherlands

+31 252 544896
+31 654 792800
On 31 Jan 2005, at 23:30, Sam Heard wrote:

> Age is time after birth - we are not going to change that.
>
> We have agreed that we need to record one more date in the demographic 
> model - which is 'approximate date of conception', or 'expected date 
> of birth'
>
> Which do people prefer - I chose the latter as it will probably be a 
> cut and paste from the mothers record and does not get into the when 
> did I conceive stuff.
>
> What do others think?
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 704 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

Age and named quantities

[Sam Heard]

Dear All

Age is time after birth - we are not going to change that.

We have agreed that we need to record one more date in the demographic 
model - which is 'approximate date of conception', or 'expected date of 
birth'

Which do people prefer - I chose the latter as it will probably be a cut 
and paste from the mothers record and does not get into the when did I 
conceive stuff.

What do others think?


FinallyI am proposing that we think about a new class (?datatype) 
such as 'DV_Textural_Ordered' for dealing with named quantities - which 
have DV_ORDERED or DV_INTERVAL as their value - a fuzzy quantity.

Examples in XML might be something like:


"Birth"

0
"days"




"Adolescence"


12
"years"


18
"years"





"Three times a day"

"FREQ=BYDAY;OCCURRENCES=3"





"Three times a day"

"0800;1400;2000"





"Last night"


20:00


06:00





The problem is that they would not be available through inheritence - so 
the possibility of entering these classes would have to be constrained.

This is just thinking out loud.

Cheers, Sam


Gerard Freriks wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> It is fine for me when we can agree that we mean by 'Age' time after birth.
> 
> How will we name and define concepts like: youth, post conception, post 
> gestation, middel aged, elderly?
> 
> Gerard
> --  --
> Gerard Freriks, arts
> Huigsloterdijk 378
> 2158 LR Buitenkaag
> The Netherlands
> 
> +31 252 544896
> +31 654 792800
> On 31 Jan 2005, at 19:10, William E Hammond wrote:
> 
> For an age, I agree that the date of birth is adequate as long as you
> remember people do not age after they die. It is also convenient to
> have a
> reference time mark for many things, including conception, start of a
> course of treatment. Adjectives and nouns are difficult to put into
> algorithms unless the definitions are precise.
> 
> Ed Hammond
> 
-
If you have any questions about using this list,
please send a message to d.lloyd at openehr.org