on github (https://github.com/caregraf/simpleknowledgeservice), I'm
assembling as simple a knowledge service as possible for medical schemes
(RxNORM, ...) using SKOS, JSON-LD and giving a choice of MongoDB or
Fuseki/Jena. To be useful, the schemes are being versioned and re-released
monthly.
I kno
thus far collected)
>
> Paul Alagna - 732 322 5641
> pjala...@gmail.com
>
>
>
> On Jun 7, 2013, at 2:41 PM, carl mattocks wrote:
>
> sentiments that you agree with
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Conor Dowling
> Date: Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 2:29 PM
> S
(David - correct me if I'm wrong here).
The emphasis of the health-care sessions at SemTech was on RDF to "*surface
your semantics*" (Charlie Mead's phrase), as one medium for *both data and
schema*.
No data arrangement is forced on you when you expose what you have. As
David said at SemTech, "RD
Hello again Scott,
the requirement of the VistA work (http://vista.caregraf.info) is to expose
ALL VistA data as RDF described graph - not just carefully curated slivers,
to be fully automated - so no special clean up, and only then to normalize
and refine the result, either through entailment or
uot;what" of clinical models.
>
> On the one hand we're talking about all the possible things you could do,
> and on the other hand, the main real thing we really do is use SNOMED for
> "what".
>
> SNOMED is very strong in "Clinical Findings, Diseases, Ob
D hierarchies are in general "what"
> things.
>
>
>
>
> *NOTICE TO RECIPIENT:* If you are not the intended recipient of this
> e-mail, you are prohibited from sharing, copying, or otherwise using or
> disclosing its contents. If you have received this e-mail in error, p
apologies if this is a tangent but why is what's identified as
"extensional" particular to health-care? "Who" said/observed/found/acted
"What", "When" and "Where" is surely a general notion. Does it need a
health-care model or ontology? Yes, particular findings or observations or
procedures can be
Bassam,
Linked-data and the File-motif (CCD approach) are two approaches to data
publication and no matter which medium you choose, you will employ both
secure and open information. A statement like "Joe Smith was admitted to
UCLA Medical center” is wholly private but “UCLA Medical Center is in
We
to a CCD if XSLT is your poison.
Conor
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 9:02 AM, Mark wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 08:48:04 -0700, conor dowling <
> conor-dowl...@caregraf.com> wrote:
>
>
> true but I think this is more comfort and tool-chain stuff than a matter
>> of
>
RDF, but much of the world (outside the USA) is already
> using the RIM.
>
>
>
>
>
> *
> NOTICE TO RECIPIENT:* If you are not the intended recipient of this
> e-mail, you are prohibited from sharing, copying, or otherwise using or
> disclosing its contents. If you
this
> e-mail, you are prohibited from sharing, copying, or otherwise using or
> disclosing its contents. If you have received this e-mail in error, please
> notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and permanently delete this
> e-mail and any attachments without reading, fo
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Michael Miller
wrote:
> hi all,
>
>
>
> "unambiguous identifier for "things""
>
>
>
> i agree, this has been a known issue for many years (as you well know, tim)
> but its importance is just now growing as multi-omics studies and sharing of
> EHR records is becomin
in Caregraf, we've been working in meaningful use (CCDs, CDA, HL7 RIM) for
the last year and use a pipeline that goes from a graph store (RDF) of
patient data into the government required CCDs. The process was recently
certified for meaningful use.
A quick compare and contrast between the CCD and
> 2. I favor doing all significant transformations at the RDF level -- not
> XML. In other words, transform to/from XML only at the edges, using a
> trivial transformation between XML and RDF, and then use ontologies and
> rules to transform to/from that RDF and RDF that is expressed in your
> pre
> > take a graph of patient data, it chief
> > nodes, its bnodes and subordinate nodes and serialize into some flavor of
> > schema'ed XML.
>
> is it reasonable to do that with SPARQL queries and then an XSLT of
> the resulting XML structure?
>
Eric,
yep. You can walk a graph of data picking up t
Eric,
sorry, if this is a "late to the party" question - is this to translate
records of existing patients coded in this XML form (indivo) into
equivalents in RDF OR is it to go the other way?
I ask because right now, I'm involved in turning RDF graphs of patients into
CCDs, which though CCDs app
quick note for the interested.
Just finished up at the NHIN CONNECT meeting in Miami and
terminology/concept mapping and exchanging structured health data, rather
than just unstructured documents, are definitely in play now. The DoD and
others discussed their work at some length (I showed off our
Susie,
one thing I said i'd mail about before this call was a basic demo of linking
a standard patient record (CCD) into the VA VistA EHR using SPARQL
endpoints. I put it here: http://www.caregraf.org/veganvet/demo
Stuff is missing but should be there by week's end: biggest is queries that
use co
Prabhu,
that sounds a lot like VistA (MUMPS/Cache) and its "modernized" vocab
management. Central ("locked-down") vocabs pushed into every system - all
entries given unique ids (called "VUID"s). Was this a custom, in-house
system or ...?
Conor
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 8:00 AM, Prabhu Shankar wrote
ragmatic,
> but personally I'm really trying to get at _exactly_ what we're proposing
> here and how we want to structure the proposal to speak to the needs and
> concerns of the target audience. That's what the storyboard is really
> about.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Eric
Bosse,
my two pence worth is to emphasize how linked data avoids the biggest
problem of interoperability/federation etc. - gateways/translation code, the
brittle crud strewn in every IT shop that costs so much to maintain.
People have querying today (usually SQL). They have remote access techniqu
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Susie Stephens
wrote:
> The Translational Medicine Ontology (TMO) task has created some fake
> patient data in RDF. We are working to create an interface to that data and
> other data that we have in RDF, e.g. pharmacogenomics, side effects,
> diagnostics, formula
obviously - I am too!
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 6:20 AM, Pan, Tony wrote:
> Definitely interested.
>
> Tony
>
> -Original Message-
> From: dan russler [mailto:dan.russ...@oracle.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 12, 2010 9:19 AM
> To: Kingsley Idehen
> Cc: conor dowlin
> Now, on the face of it, such data is meaningless outside this VistA. We
>> need a "mapping layer", an "RPC". A "type-mapper". A reformatter. Layers ...
>> BUT WE KNOW (on this group) that it is trival to do something like ...
>>:120.51/1 same as -> SNOMED:39257000
> > U.S.? (There's little here from what I can see - the interoperability
> push is around SOAP).
>
> In my view, SOAP is the wrong direction. It is just adds complexity and
> contributes to "babelization":
> http://www.w3.org/2003/Talks/0717-semweb-dbooth/slide10-0.html
>
you're right but here's
Is anyone on the group involved or know about adding a Semantic Endpoint to
an EHR system? I'm working on a SPARQL "profile" called FMQL (see:
http://www.caregraf.org/semanticvista#fmql ) for VA's VistA, the most widely
deployed EMR in the U.S. (and open-sourced to boot). You can see/code-to the
cu
26 matches
Mail list logo
