Yes, I expect that helps considerably, Jeff.

-- 
Dan

________________________________________
From: Klann, Jeffrey G. [[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 10:21 AM
To: Dan Connolly; [email protected]; [email protected]; 
[email protected]
Subject: Re: [gpc-informatics] #191: represent PCORI CDM 2.x terminology as 
i2b2 metadata

I can call in tomorrow 9/22. Can¹t make it the 29th. I hope that helps!

Jeff


On 9/16/15, 4:51 PM, "Dan Connolly" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Jeff,
>
>We're interested to compare a few different approaches to ETL around i2b2
>and CDM. We'd like you (and/or other folks knowledgeable about the SCILHS
>approach) to join us at our next weekly meeting(s): Tuesdays, 11am
>central time (noon Eastern, if I've done my timezone math correctly). The
>next one is Sep 22, but the discussion is likely to continue into our Sep
>29 meeting. How does that work for you?
>
>I'll also send an iCalendar invitation...
>
>--
>Dan
>
>________________________________________
>From: Klann, Jeffrey G. [[email protected]]
>Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2015 1:42 PM
>To: [email protected]; Dan Connolly; [email protected];
>[email protected]
>Subject: RE: [gpc-informatics] #191: represent PCORI CDM 2.x terminology
>as i2b2 metadata
>
>I've been getting these emails and this is great news that you've found
>our ontology easy to leverage. Let me know if I can be of any help.
>
>FYI, I'd be happy to integrate/accept your improvements into our ontology
>release if they align. What are the improvements? LOINC mappings?
>
>Also fyi, our timeline for CDMv3 is also soon - 10/1 (except for some
>small sections like the trial table). The Google Drive that we've shared
>with collaborators already has CDMv3 ontologies for everything except
>PRO, Death, Trial, and Harvest. (I imagine Dan and co have seen this.) We
>are using modifiers to distinguish Diagnosis from Condition and
>Prescribed from Dispensed, so these are not separate trees.
>
>Thanks!
>
>Jeffrey Klann, PhD
>Instructor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School
>Assistant in Computer Science, Massachusetts General Hospital
>PhD in Research, Partners Healthcare Research Computing
>ofc: 617-643-5879
>email: [email protected]
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: GPC Informatics [mailto:[email protected]]
>> Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2015 1:00 PM
>> To: [email protected]; [email protected];
>> [email protected]
>> Cc: [email protected]; Klann, Jeffrey G.
>> Subject: Re: [gpc-informatics] #191: represent PCORI CDM 2.x
>> terminology as i2b2 metadata
>>
>> #191: represent PCORI CDM 2.x terminology as i2b2 metadata
>> -----------------------+------------------------
>>  Reporter:  dconnolly  |       Owner:  dconnolly
>>      Type:  problem    |      Status:  new
>>  Priority:  medium     |   Milestone:
>> Component:  data-stds  |  Resolution:
>>  Keywords:             |  Blocked By:  109
>>  Blocking:  317        |
>> -----------------------+------------------------
>>
>> Comment (by nateapathy):
>>
>>  Our implementation effort estimation ended up being much more than the
>> actual work effort, which was very reassuring. The SCILHS ontology, due
>> to  its limited granularity, is pretty straightforward to implement,
>> and  follows best practices for i2b2 design, which makes it easier to
>> implement. In terms of mapping our hierarchies and terms to the SCILHS
>> ontology hierarchies and terms, that effort which we thought would be
>> monumental, was actually not nearly as cumbersome as we thought,
>> largely  because we were already fairly well aligned since
>> (specifically for
>>  demographics) Cerner i2b2 uses the standard i2b2 demographic ontology,
>> and  the SCILHS ontology sticks fairly closely to that design. Granted,
>> the  ease of that transition was due in large part to our local
>> standard  following the i2b2 standard pretty tightly, so the degree to
>> which on a  site has deviated from the i2b2 standard ontologies will be
>> a good proxy  for work effort to align with SCILHS.
>>
>> --
>> Ticket URL:
>> <http://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/ticket/191#comment:10>
>> gpc-informatics <http://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/>
>> Greater Plains Network - Informatics
>
>
>The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it
>is
>addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the
>e-mail
>contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance
>HelpLine at
>http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in
>error
>but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and
>properly
>dispose of the e-mail.

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

Reply via email to