Hi Dan,

Thanks for the explanation. I just wanted to confirm we hadn't introduced a bug.

Do you know if the BC team members account for losing the encounter in their 
analysis? (Is it relevant at this stage?)

Thanks,
Laurel

From: Dan Connolly [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 2:48 PM
To: Verhagen, Laurel A
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Question on the Data Builder (loses Encounter context)

Yes, the data builder loses encounter context.

What the data builder does is:

  *   Given

     *   a patient set
     *   a list of variables/terms/concepts

  *   Build a table of all facts about those patients with terms dominated by 
those given.
It doesn't try to reproduce the logic behind the query that went into choosing 
the patient set.

We're actually working on that. I'm finishing up limiting by dates* and 
starting to work on selecting modifiers.

And our REDCap integration is somewhat sensitive to encounter context.

* I'd push the code to elephant, but the relevant disk seems to be down after a 
reboot.

--
Dan
________________________________
From: Verhagen, Laurel A [[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 1:54 PM
To: Dan Connolly
Subject: Question on the Data Builder
Hi Dan,

Quick question for you: Does the Data Builder lose the Encounter context when 
it generates files? While QA'ing results from the Data Builder Data Summary, I 
found some inconsistencies.

For example, the Data Summary email listed:
Variable                                                               N. 
Patient            N. Obs
0830 Regional Nodes Examined                 44                           59

If I ran the query in in i2b2 for 0830 using "Selected groups occur in the same 
financial encounter" with SEER Site Summary = breast and the 0810 Class of Care 
exclusions, the result was 0.

When we pulled the list of 44 patients, mapped back to medical history number, 
and reviewed the charts, we found that code 0830 was related to a different 
tumor, diagnosed prior to 2013. (This also helped uncover a different issue to 
investigate, which is that field 0830 hasn't been filled since 2010 for our 
registry.)

Thanks,
Laurel

________________________________
The contents of this message may contain private, protected and/or privileged 
information. If you received this message in error, you should destroy the 
e-mail message and any attachments or copies, and you are prohibited from 
retaining, distributing, disclosing or using any information contained within. 
Please contact the sender and advise of the erroneous delivery by return e-mail 
or telephone. Thank you for your cooperation.

______________________________________________________________________
The contents of this message may contain private, protected and/or privileged 
information.  If you received this message in error, you should destroy the 
e-mail message and any attachments or copies, and you are prohibited from 
retaining, distributing, disclosing or using any information contained within.  
Please contact the sender and advise of the erroneous delivery by return e-mail 
or telephone.  Thank you for your cooperation.
_______________________________________________
Gpc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://listserv.kumc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gpc-dev

Reply via email to