it'd be either Orders and Observations or Modeling and Methodology.
I don't think that your proposed solution is valid. It meets the
syntactical requirements while making a mess of any semantic
meaning.
Grahame
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 10:26 PM, Leonardo Moretti
lmoretti at noemalife.com wrote:
On 29/05/2011 22:50, Grahame Grieve wrote:
it'd be either Orders and Observations or Modeling and Methodology.
I don't think that your proposed solution is valid. It meets the
syntactical requirements while making a mess of any semantic
meaning.
well... ok, but {} in UCUM is for things
In UCUM, the period '.' is only used as a multiplication operator, thus ?2.7?
means always 2 ? 7 and is not equal to 27/10.
The use of curly brace is already part of UCUM systax, so it would be
already compliant with it.
I haven't yet found any mailing list in HL7 which deals with this aspect..
Hi all,
I thought a lot on your proposal.
If we want to use pseudo-units (non-UCUM terms), then we have to be able to
distinguish when a term is in UCUM syntax. For example g/m2.7 is a valid
UCUM string, but it is interpreted as (g/m^2) * 7 and not as g/(m^2.7),
because in UCUM ?.? is the symbol
On 26/05/2011 16:48, Leonardo Moretti wrote:
Hi all,
I thought a lot on your proposal.
If we want to use pseudo-units (non-UCUM terms), then we have to be able to
distinguish when a term is in UCUM syntax. For example g/m2.7 is a valid
UCUM string, but it is interpreted as (g/m^2) * 7 and
Hmm, haven't had a chance to read the full thread but does this mean I can also
represent Gauge as a Quantity unit (which is not part of openEHR terminology)
similarly?
Cheers,
-koray
-Original Message-
From: openehr-technical-bounces at openehr.org
'...twopointseven', or ask the cardiologists to give the unit a name. heartz?
Regards,
Colin
On 29/04/2011, at 9:44 PM, Ian McNicoll Ian.McNicoll at
oceaninformatics.com wrote:
This kind of scenario is very common and we need to establish some guidelines
and governance about how to handle
Hi Leo
Can you please provide some references to show the use of height^2.7?
Grahame
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 6:47 PM, Moretti Leonardo
lmoretti at noemalife.com wrote:
In cardiology, left ventricular mass (LVM) is often indexed to better
identify left ventricular hypertrophy.
Possible
There's some question about whether such a funky unit is
a proper unit. It does look rather like a statistical imagination
to me, rather than an actual unit.
I'm not sure where the right place to discuss this is. I'll let
you know when I find out.
Grahame
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 12:50 AM,
Hi Leo
Gunther says that these units are not proper units.
http://www.xkaw.com/Education_Reference/Science_Mathematics.asp?id=2276318
There's a possible question of scope alignment here. It's kind of tantamount to
saying that a measure like that is not a proper measurement. I don't think
I
it is a pretty weird unit, since it is partway between 2-d and 3-d
space, and therefore partway between the concept of 'area' and that of
'volume'. So whether it is acceptable depends on whether we think that
such concepts are meaningful in the activity we call 'measurement' in
the physical
I think that we at least need to find out what the physical basis of
this unit is. I could not find any definitive reference online, only
papers reporting its use. Any cardiologists here?
- thomas
On 29/04/2011 10:25, Grahame Grieve wrote:
Hi Tom
It's a strange concept for sure. The real
This kind of scenario is very common and we need to establish some
guidelines and governance about how to handle these sort of 'pseudo-units',
so that vendors can get on with some kind of implementation while these sort
of difficult and obscure issues are discussed.
Am I correct in thinking that
hi Leo
I have forwarded this question onto the UCUM wizard (Gunther Schadow).
It's a pretty good question. Simply allowing the decimal would make the
syntax ambiguous, but there's no easy way to do it any other way.
Grahame
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 6:47 PM, Moretti Leonardo
lmoretti at
Hi
there are a lots of scientific publications treating the indexations of left
ventricular mass (LVM).
I can link some abstracts, but the whole PDF documents are not public:
- http://www.nature.com/jhh/journal/v23/n11/full/jhh200916a.html
- http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11729247
or here
15 matches
Mail list logo
