Phil We have the response on data element standardization from Regenstrief for all V1 observables and we have workable ontologies for CPT and ICD-9-CM. UNMC will be posting these to Babel forthwith and they are core datasets for CDM V1 compliance. Mapping to these data elements from our EHR systems is a second layer requirement but we will be publishing those ETLs where different than KU HERONDATA for Epic systems V2012. It appears to me that Nate Apathy is well ahead of the curve for Cerner and I apologize that I have no help to offer Marshfield other than the standard data tags for our shared network data. Jim
James R. Campbell MD [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Office: 402-559-7505 Secretary: 402-559-7299 Pager: 402-888-1230 On Oct 23, 2014, at 7:30 PM, "Phillip Reeder" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Would it be possible for us to set a milestone/date to have a release of a GPC Terminology v1 at some point in the near future? My thought is that it would contain the most updated terminology that we would like all GPC sites to be able to comply with. At least for us at UTSW, that would help to clear out some of the forest and set some clear goals for our implementation. We may need to leave out some domains that don’t have a clear terminology ready, like CPT or labs, but those could be added in a future release. I think it would also allow us to clearly see the progress across the 10 sites as we would have a defined measuring point. Phillip From: Dan Connolly <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Friday, October 3, 2014 at 1:10 PM To: Phillip Reeder <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: RE: GPC Priority Data Types Good question. A number of requests to help see the forest for the trees have come up lately. Along with the leading sites by domain spreadsheet<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-uW2hod63gdlNlLAkhleuMvnQG6zNaw2jd-CAhSLqkk/edit?usp=sharing>, I've been going through a KeyGoalTracking<https://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/wiki/KeyGoalTracking> exercise in the last few days, but I'm not sure how many of the questions it answers, so I'd like to discuss this sort of stuff a bit more. The first headline there is: * Breast Cancer Cohort Selection needs Tumor Registry in i2b2 by Nov 15<https://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/wiki/KeyGoalTracking#BreastCancerCohortSelectionneedsTumorRegistryini2b2byNov15> UTSA is leading in that area; I hope you can help get some of the other sites up to speed (which is largely separate from the business of updating your own i2b2 data). Actually, I gather the breast cancer cohort query is also going to use a few procedures, so we'll need alignment on those, if not all of CPT. Ah... I should add that to the dependency diagram.... done. The KUMC CPT hierarchy is a bit of a mess. UIOWA is leading there, along with UNMC, so I look forward to details from them soon. TODO: make ticket. The ALS survey cohort query just needs diagnoses, I think. And just a few of those. You ask about PCORI CDN; that's another key goal: * PCORNet DRN (CDM) query readiness<https://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/wiki/KeyGoalTracking#drn-cdm-query> For DRN queries, a GPC-aligned i2b2 includes at least: * GPC Demographics (#67<https://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/ticket/67>) * GPC Diagnoses (#63<https://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/ticket/63>) * GPC Encounters (#155<https://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/ticket/155>) * GPC Enrollment * GPC Procedures * GPC Vitals (#23<https://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/ticket/23>) DRG? I had forgotten those are part of the CDM. Right... under Encounter. MCW and KUMC are supposed to lead that, so if you want to wait until you've heard from us on those, that's fair. To the extent that vitals data are in flowsheets, you'll need flowsheets mapped to LOINC (e.g. BMI). The larger GPC alignment and data delivery goals go beyond CDM; I have a big picture view (#160<https://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/ticket/160>) but not a clear handle on how it breaks down to who does what. On Medications, I thought (#63<https://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/ticket/63>) gave the necessary details. I saw you sent some questions yesterday at 10:20am; I didn't quite understand them. I hope Nathan Graham or somebody will answer soonish. As far as I can tell, the goals that require meds are further off. Requirements for labs are also further off, I think, but I hope to hear soon from those that stepped forward at Tuesday's meeting: Supreet @UMN, Scott at UNMC, Stuart. I expect priorities to be demand-driven, and just keeping up with which demands connect to which data sources and design issues is more than I can keep track of already. Does this provide the bulk of an answer? Maybe it helps you refine your question somehow? -- Dan ________________________________ From: Phillip Reeder [[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>] Sent: Friday, October 03, 2014 12:08 PM To: Dan Connolly Subject: GPC Priority Data Types Is there a prioritized list of the data types that we need for GPC? We’re currently looking at a bunch of different data that are in need of changes, or to be added to our i2b2 and it would help us set our internal priorities if we could match it up to the GPC. Is there a master list of data types and priorities that we should go off of? For example: Medications – currently in our i2b2, but the hierarchy is not ideal. We are looking into mapping to RXNorm and using NDFRT for the hierarchy. Labs – currently in i2b2, but we have some issues with the hierarchy and with the units of data. We have some mapped to LOINC, but haven’t built out the LOINC hierarchy yet. Flowsheet Data – Not in i2b2, but its on our radar. Tumor Registry – Done for us, other sites are still working on it. >From PCORI CDN Discharge Disposition & Status Inpatient DRG info Admitting Source I know you showed an excel sheet at the last call that had some info about the data types, maybe that could be modified to put a priority on various data. Feel free to send this out to the GPC Dev group, or put it on the discussion for the next call, whichever you feel is the best way to prioritize these. Thanks, Phillip ________________________________ UT Southwestern Medical Center The future of medicine, today. _______________________________________________ Gpc-dev mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> http://listserv.kumc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gpc-dev 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.
_______________________________________________ Gpc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://listserv.kumc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gpc-dev
