Let's try to include the SEER version of variables wherever possible so we can have that information when it comes time to compare the sources.
So add 220 Sex to the list, okay? -----Original Message----- From: Jianghua He [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 12:04 PM To: '[email protected]'; Dan Connolly; Tamara McMahon; Chrischilles, Elizabeth A Subject: RE: [gpc-informatics] #204: i2b2 query for underlying breast cancer study population In my report, I used the sex in automatically pulled patient demographics and didn't specifically pull any sex variable. I just did a search on the large cohort for female only using both sex and gender, I got the same number. Wendy -----Original Message----- From: GPC Informatics [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 11:56 AM To: Dan Connolly; Tamara McMahon; Jianghua He; [email protected] Subject: Re: [gpc-informatics] #204: i2b2 query for underlying breast cancer study population #204: i2b2 query for underlying breast cancer study population ----------------------------------+----------------------------------- Reporter: dconnolly | Owner: tmcmahon Type: design-issue | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: bc-survey-cohort-def Component: data-sharing | Resolution: Keywords: breast-cancer-cohort | Blocked By: 167 Blocking: 205 | ----------------------------------+----------------------------------- Comment (by bchrischilles): Tamara - We used Sex from the registry data rather than Gender (220 Sex) The Race variables are I believe: 160 Race 1 161 Race 2 162 Race 3 163 Race 4 164 Race 5 Replying to [comment:5 tmcmahon]: > Language > Gender -- Ticket URL: <http://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/ticket/204#comment:7> gpc-informatics <http://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/> Greater Plains Network - Informatics _______________________________________________ Gpc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://listserv.kumc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gpc-dev
