They are both Same-AS I kept that in the comment to keep the separate from my 
side...
-------------------- 
Andrew S. Kanter, MD MPH 


Asst. Prof. of Clinical Biomedical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology

Columbia University
Email: andrew.kan...@dbmi.columbia.edu 
Mobile: +1 (646) 469-2421
Office: +1 (212) 305-4842
Skype: akanter-ippnw
Yahoo: andy_kanter



>________________________________
> From: Rafal Korytkowski <ra...@openmrs.org>
>To: openmrs-deve...@listserv.iupui.edu 
>Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 5:41 AM
>Subject: Re: [OPENMRS-DEV] Migrating concept mappings to 1.9
> 
>
>Andy, do we need to have two separate map types for "SAME-AS" and "SAME-AS 
>from RxNORM" or the latter can be represented as "SAME-AS"?
>
>-Rafał
>
>
>On 10 May 2012 19:21, Andrew Kanter <andy_kan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>New version openmrs_concepts_1.6.5_20120510.sql uploaded to CIEL dropbox. 
>Rafal, please view this carefully as I generated things quickly...
>> 
>>-------------------- 
>>Andrew S. Kanter, MD MPH 
>>
>>
>>Asst. Prof. of Clinical Biomedical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology
>>
>>Columbia University
>>Email: andrew.kan...@dbmi.columbia.edu 
>>Mobile: +1 (646) 469-2421
>>Office: +1 (212) 305-4842
>>Skype:
 akanter-ippnw
>>Yahoo: andy_kanter
>>
>>
>>
>>>________________________________
>>> From: Darius Jazayeri <djazayeri+...@gmail.com>
>>>To: openmrs-deve...@listserv.iupui.edu 
>>>Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 11:47 AM
>>>
>>>Subject: Re: [OPENMRS-DEV] Migrating concept mappings to 1.9
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>>Hi Rafal et al,
>>>
>>>
>>>Andy and I just discussed this on the phone, and as he says below, the "Map 
>>>Type: #" comments in the MVP dictionary are totally unrelated to the actual 
>>>map type ids we introduce in 1.9.
>>>
>>>
>>>Andy is going to (today if he has time) change those in his database so they 
>>>say something like "Map Type: SAME-AS" intstead, and re-export the 
>>>dictionary for us.
>>>
>>>
>>>Is it straightforward to change the upgrade scripts so that they look for 
>>>"Map Type: NAME-OF-MAP-TYPE" instead?
>>>
>>>
>>>-Darius
>>>
>>>
>>>On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 7:30 AM, Andrew Kanter <andy_kan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>Folks,
>>>>I don't think the original comments had anything to do with the list which 
>>>>appears in OpenMRS now for mapping sources... so the original map presented 
>>>>was definitely wrong. Please see the bottom of this email for corrected 
>>>>maps from the existing comments to the new map types.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Andy
>>>> 
>>>>-------------------- 
>>>>Andrew S. Kanter, MD MPH 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Asst. Prof. of Clinical Biomedical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology
>>>>
>>>>Columbia University
>>>>Email: andrew.kan...@dbmi.columbia.edu 
>>>>Mobile: +1 (646) 469-2421
>>>>Office: +1 (212) 305-4842
>>>>Skype: akanter-ippnw
>>>>Yahoo: andy_kanter
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>________________________________
>>>>> From: Rafal Korytkowski <ra...@openmrs.org>
>>>>>To: openmrs-deve...@listserv.iupui.edu 
>>>>>
>>>>>Sent: Monday, May 7, 2012 11:04 AM
>>>>>Subject: Re: [OPENMRS-DEV] Migrating concept mappings to 1.9
>>>>> 
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks Andy! When do you think you'll have time to look into that comments 
>>>>>and see if they can be matched with proper mapping types from 1.9? Below 
>>>>>is a full list of predefined mapping types in 1.9:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>+---------------------+-------------------------------
>>>>>| concept_map_type_id | name
>>>>>+---------------------+-------------------------------
>>>>>|                   1 | SAME-AS  =
>>>>>|                   2 | NARROWER-THAN
>>>>>|                   3 | BROADER-THAN
>>>>>|                   4 | Associated finding
>>>>>|                   5 | Associated morphology
>>>>>|                   6 | Associated procedure
>>>>>|                   7 | Associated with
>>>>>|                   8 | Causative agent
>>>>>|                   9 | Finding site
>>>>>|                  10 | Has specimen
>>>>>|                  11 | Laterality
>>>>>|                  12 | Severity
>>>>>|                  13 | Access
>>>>>|                  14 | After
>>>>>|                  15 | Clinical course
>>>>>|                  16 | Component
>>>>>|                  17 | Direct device
>>>>>|                  18 | Direct morphology
>>>>>|                  19 | Direct substance
>>>>>|                  20 | Due to
>>>>>|                  21 | Episodicity
>>>>>|                  22 | Finding context
>>>>>|                  23 | Finding informer
>>>>>|                  24 | Finding method
>>>>>|                  25 | Has active ingredient
>>>>>|                  26 | Has definitional manifestation
>>>>>|                  27 | Has dose form
>>>>>|                  28 | Has focus
>>>>>|                  29 | Has intent
>>>>>|                  30 | Has interpretation
>>>>>|                  31 | Indirect device
>>>>>|                  32 | Indirect morphology
>>>>>|                  33 | Interprets
>>>>>|                  34 | Measurement method
>>>>>|                  35 | Method
>>>>>|                  36 | Occurrence
>>>>>|                  37 | Part of
>>>>>|                  38 | Pathological process
>>>>>|                  39 | Priority
>>>>>|                  40 | Procedure context
>>>>>|                  41 | Procedure device
>>>>>|                  42 | Procedure morphology
>>>>>|                  43 | Procedure site
>>>>>|                  44 | Procedure site - Direct
>>>>>|                  45 | Procedure site - Indirect
>>>>>|                  46 | Property
>>>>>|                  47 | Recipient category
>>>>>|                  48 | Revision status
>>>>>|                  49 | Route of administration
>>>>>|                  50 | Scale type
>>>>>|                  51 | Specimen procedure
>>>>>|                  52 | Specimen source identity
>>>>>|                  53 | Specimen source morphology
>>>>>|                  54 | Specimen source topography
>>>>>|                  55 | Specimen substance
>>>>>|                  56 | Subject of information
>>>>>|                  57 | Subject relationship context
>>>>>|                  58 | Surgical approach
>>>>>|                  59 | Temporal context
>>>>>|                  60 | Time aspect
>>>>>|                  61 | Using access device
>>>>>|                  62 | Using device
>>>>>|                  63 | Using energy
>>>>>|                  64 | Using substance
>>>>>|                  65 | IS A
>>>>>|                  66 | MAY BE A
>>>>>|                  67 | MOVED FROM
>>>>>|                  68 | MOVED TO
>>>>>|                  69 | REPLACED BY
>>>>>|                  70 | WAS A
>>>>>+---------------------+-------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>>-Rafał
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>On 4 May 2012 23:35, Andrew Kanter <andy_kan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>Yes, we did that from IMO and I included in that in some... however, it is 
>>>>>not at all consistent. Where we have it, we should use it. There shouldn't 
>>>>>be dupes with the same map type. I will look through this...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Thanks!
>>>>>>Andy
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>P.S. Great news about MDS... now just need to fix the concepts :)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>-------------------- 
>>>>>>Andrew S. Kanter, MD MPH 
>>>>>>
>>>>>>- Director of Health Information Systems/Medical Informatics
>>>>>>Millennium Villages Project, Earth Institute, Columbia University
>>>>>>- Asst. Prof. of Clinical Biomedical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology
>>>>>>Columbia University
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Email: andrew.kan...@dbmi.columbia.edu 
>>>>>>Mobile: +1 (646) 469-2421
>>>>>>Office: +1 (212) 305-4842
>>>>>>Skype: akanter-ippnw
>>>>>>Yahoo: andy_kanter
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>________________________________
>>>>>>> From: Rafal Korytkowski <ra...@openmrs.org>
>>>>>>>To: openmrs-deve...@listserv.iupui.edu 
>>>>>>>Sent: Friday, May 4, 2012 11:08 AM
>>>>>>>Subject: [OPENMRS-DEV] Migrating concept mappings to 1.9
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Hi Andy,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>We have noticed that MVP uses the comment field in the concept_map 
>>>>>>>table. We are considering using that to determine the right map type in 
>>>>>>>1.9.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I ran the following query select comment, count(*) from concept_map 
>>>>>>>group by comment; The results are below. I have also added corresponding 
>>>>>>>map types from 1.9, but I am not sure if they match right now. We could 
>>>>>>>correct them if needed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>+----------------------+----------+
>>>>>>>| comment              | count(*) |
>>>>>>>+----------------------+----------+
>>>>>>>| NULL                 |    15516 |
>>>>>>>| From Excel           |     2381 |
>>>>>>>| From UMLS RxNORM Map |     3010 |
>>>>>>>
| Map Type: 1          |    46897 | => SAME AS
>>>>>>>| Map Type: 10         |        1 | Mistake... should be Map Type: 3
>>>>>>>| Map Type: 17         |        5 | => Associated with
>>>>>>>| Map Type: 19         |        3 | => Associated with
>>>>>>>| Map Type: 2          |     1880 |=> BROADER-THAN
>>>>>>>| Map Type: 24         |       18 | => Associated procedure
>>>>>>>| Map Type: 3          |    30841 | => NARROWER-THAN
>>>>>>>| Map Type: 4          |      126 | => Associated finding
>>>>>>>| Map Type: 5          |       81 | => Associated Morphology
>>>>>>>| Map Type: 6          |       19 | => Finding Site
>>>>>>>| Map Type: 7          |        2 | => Associated with
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>+----------------------+----------+
>>>>>>>14 rows in set (2.12 sec)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Here's the proposed migration algorithm:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>(1) if the comment matches "Map Type: (\d+)" then use that to determine 
>>>>>>>the map type, and drop it
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>(2) otherwise move the comment to concept_reference_term.description 
>>>>>>>(even though it doesn't really belong there)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>(3) delete duplicate concept_reference_terms (having same source and 
>>>>>>>source_code), though this means we may lose some concept_map.comment data
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The reason for these changes is: TRUNK-3296: Found multiple reference 
>>>>>>>terms
>>>>>>>https://tickets.openmrs.org/browse/TRUNK-3296
>>>>>>>-Rafał
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>________________________________
>>>>>>> Click here to unsubscribe from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>________________________________
>>>>>> Click here to unsubscribe from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>________________________________
>>>>> Click here to unsubscribe from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list 
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>________________________________
>>>> Click here to unsubscribe from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list
>>>
>>>________________________________
>>> Click here to unsubscribe from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list 
>>>
>>>
>>
>>________________________________
>> Click here to unsubscribe from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list
>>________________________________
> Click here to unsubscribe from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list 
>
>

_________________________________________

To unsubscribe from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list, send an e-mail to 
lists...@listserv.iupui.edu with "SIGNOFF openmrs-devel-l" in the  body (not 
the subject) of your e-mail.

[mailto:lists...@listserv.iupui.edu?body=SIGNOFF%20openmrs-devel-l]

Reply via email to