Team

So my understanding from the response by DSSNI (below) is that ETL ADD should 
be populated as follows for encounters:



DATA SUMMARY.ENCOUNTER.ENC_TYPE should have inclusive stats of all encounters 
by type on your site

...DIAGNOSIS.ENC_TYPE should have (fewer) entries and should be all encounters 
populated w diagnosis data

...PROCEDURES.ENC_TYPE should have fewer than ENCOUNTER numbers and should be a 
count of all encounters by type populated with procedure data



In order to close down this week, I would also ask all the site ETL managers to 
fill out the enrollment table and file the update to PCORNET desktop, 
indicating that the enrollment class  has been deferred but will be created for 
your site by the method of your choosing as we have discussed.

Jim

________________________________
From: PCORnet Data Standards, Security, and Network Infrastructure Task Force 
[[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2014 9:56 AM
To: Campbell, James R
Cc: Shelley Rusincovitch; Jenny Ibarra
Subject: Re: ETL ADD question

Dear Jim,

Thank you for following up regarding your question about the ETL ADD data 
summary tab information.  It seems that I may be misunderstanding your previous 
questions, if you think it would be beneficial I am happy to speak on the 
phone.  My phone number is 617-509-9742.  I will do my best to answer your 
question as I understand it below:

There is a breakdown of ENC_TYPE for all three sections, Encounter, Diagnosis, 
and Procedure which should result in different counts depending on the section.

The Encounter table should include all encounters of any type - diagnosis or 
procedure. It is my understanding that the count by ENC_TYPE should vary based 
upon every encounter being included in the encounter table, diagnosis 
encounters included in the diagnosis table, and procedure encounters included 
in the procedure table.

I see it as a Venn Diagram where the Encounter table will encompass both 
diagnosis and procedure.

I hope this clarification is helpful.  If you have any further questions, 
please let me know.

Best,

Jessica Sturtevant

On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 8:13 PM, Campbell, James R 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Please direct your attention back to the three sections: Encounters, Diagnoses, 
Procedures.

Note that the encounter type breakdown table is present in ALL three sections.  
Are we supposed to simply duplicate stats from one section to the next?

I assume that the Encounter type table under Diagnoses and Procedures is meant 
to reflect encounter counts with diagnoses/procedures or possibly the 
diagnoses/procedure counts by those encounter types.  My sites are coming down 
on either side of that interpretation so what does PCORI want?

Jim

________________________________
From: PCORnet Data Standards, Security, and Network Infrastructure Task Force 
[[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>]
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2014 9:13 AM

To: Campbell, James R
Cc: Shelley Rusincovitch; Jenny Ibarra
Subject: Re: ETL ADD question

Hi Jim,

It is excellent that you are at the point of reviewing your site ETL ADDs.  
When do you anticipate that you will have site level PCORnet DataMarts that 
will be capable of responding to a query?

The 'Data Summary' tab for diagnosis and procedure is meant to capture a raw 
count of records in each value set (e.g. DX_TYPE = 09, 10, 11, etc.).  The 
percentage would be the count of 09 in DX_TYPE divided by the sum of all counts 
for all value sets in DX_TYPE.  This is similar for ENC_TYPE.

I am not certain which table you are referring to that has a %ile summary.  
Could you please specify?

The first table consists of count of unique PATIDs, minimum and maximum 
ADMIT_DATE.  The second table is a record count summary of the variable 
ENC_TYPE.  The third table is a record count summary of the variable DX_TYPE.

If you have further questions, please feel free to email or give me a call at 
617-509-9742<tel:617-509-9742>.  This sounds like great progress!

Thank you,

Jessica Sturtevant

On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Campbell, James R 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

In reviewing completed ETLADDs from our sites, I notice some differences in the 
interpretation of the Worksheet:Data Summary tallies for Diagnoses and 
Procedures.  Each section of that worksheet has: 1) table for count and % by 
encounter type and 2) tables for a count of diagnoses and procedures by coding 
type.  The second table has %ile summary which I interpret to the fraction of 
events belonging to that class.



For table 1), is this meant to represent i) a count of diagnoses/procedures 
linked to an encounter of the listed type, or ii) a count of the encounters of 
the listed type that have associated procedure/diagnosis data?  Is the 
percentile in table 1) meant to be a relative ratio or a fraction of those 
encounters with associated data?

Jim

________________________________
From: PCORnet Data Standards, Security, and Network Infrastructure Task Force 
[[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>]
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 8:53 AM
To: Campbell, James R
Cc: Shelley Rusincovitch; Jenny Ibarra

Subject: Re: ETL ADD question

Hi Jim,

I misunderstood, I thought your question referenced the CDM enrollment section.

Once the ETL process is complete, the ETL Annotated Data Dictionary tab 'Data 
Summary' should be completed to the best of your ability.

The 'XXX Table Description' sections for each ETL Annotated Data Dictionary 
table/tab should include any details about the source data transformation to 
the PCORnet CDM, notes specific to the data source (e.g. the drop in age group 
X is real and is due to XYZ), and information about the data provider (e.g. 
included in this data are members who have medical coverage).  This type of 
information will allow the coordinating center to understand the usability of 
different data sources for specific projects and to understand data 
characteristics that might seem odd without understanding the data source 
details.

If you have any further questions, please feel free to call me at 
617-509-9742<tel:617-509-9742> or reply by email.

Thank you,

Jessica Sturtevant




On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Campbell, James R 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Jenny

I am talking about the enrollment table specified in the ETL ADD on worksheet 5 
and the Enrollment section of the Data Summary worksheet.



I have a further question:

On the Demographics worksheet there is a section at the bottom (row 14 ff) 
entitled "Demographic Table Description (required".  What information do you 
want there beyond the detailed discussion of the data elements above?

Jim

________________________________
From: PCORnet Data Standards, Security, and Network Infrastructure Task Force 
[[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>]
Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 9:53 AM
To: Campbell, James R; Shelley Rusincovitch; Jenny Ibarra
Subject: Re: ETL ADD question

Hi Jim,

Thank you for the question.  Do you mean the ENR_BASIS variable?  I have 
included DSSNI TF members Shelley Rusincovitch and Jenny Ibarra on this email 
as they have a deeper understanding of the CDM development and future plans.

Best,

Jessica Sturtevant


On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 7:51 AM, Campbell, James R 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Colleagues

I asked a couple weeks ago about the Enrollment class for PCORI CDM V1 and was 
told that for the time being it is a placeholder in the model to be elaborated 
later.  In completing our ETL ADD documents from out sites, I wish to hear 
clarification from DSSNI that we can leave this data on worksheet 'Data 
Summary' blank for the time being.

Jim Campbell

The information in this e-mail may be privileged and confidential, intended 
only for the use of the addressee(s) above. Any unauthorized use or disclosure 
of this information is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail by mistake, 
please delete it and immediately contact the sender.



--
____________________________________________________________________________
The PCORnet DSSNI Task Force
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>




--
____________________________________________________________________________
The PCORnet DSSNI Task Force
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>




--

The PCORnet DSSNI Task Force
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>




--

The PCORnet DSSNI Task Force
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

_______________________________________________
Gpc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://listserv.kumc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gpc-dev

Reply via email to