Is the version of the SCILHS ontology observable across sites? Perhaps it is, 
but I'd like to figure out exactly how so it's clear what choosing a particular 
version would entail. Our decision is "using a common approach" (Apr 25 
#160<https://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/ticket/160#comment:24>). 
There has been considerable adaptation of the approach at each site; our 
decision so far doesn't bind us to any particular version of the i2p-transform 
code nor the SCILHS ontology.

We (GPC) are using it to build CDM DataMarts at each site... and for Breast 
Cancer diagnoses and procedures, we're sharing data from CDM tables across 
sites. So if SCILHS changed their ontology, it's possible it would be visible 
via that process. But I can't put my finger on any particular way.

At KUMC, we grabbed the version as of Feb 
22<https://github.com/njgraham/scilhs-ontology/commit/527c0879e1adf5272002c50452aabfb16d89d1e3>,
 which seems to be 1.5.2. Our 
branch<https://github.com/njgraham/scilhs-ontology> is at e81dc25, "11 commits 
ahead, 78 commits behind SCILHS:master." We should probably merge those 78 
commits, but we haven't run into anything that would prompt us to do so.

Looking at their 
CHANGELOG<https://github.com/SCILHS/scilhs-ontology/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md>...
 v2.02 and v2.03 changes seem to be in labs and meds, but our adaptation of the 
i2p-transform code involves more or less replacing their labs and meds 
ontologies with our own, using pcori_basecode as a mapping.

Ah... this could be noticeable:

  *   Developed update script to add new CDM v3.0 fields to encounter, 
diagnosis, and vitals tables.

--
Dan


________________________________
From: Campbell, James R [[email protected]]
Sent: Sunday, August 28, 2016 6:22 AM
To: Dan Connolly; McClay, James C
Cc: [email protected]; Brittany Zschoche
Subject: RE: SCILHS i2b2 ontology [was: 8.24.16 GPC Site PM Notes]


Dan

I raised the question as to what metadata standard we re going to use within 
GPC to support GPC and PCORI network i2b2 interface queries between sites.  I 
understood that we would be using SCILHS and we are installing SCILHS 2.02 that 
I got from Jeff Klann.  However I did not hear a unanimous response from all 
GPC sites and some were relating that they were  using earlier versions of JK's 
code used to extract CDMV3 from SCILHS.



UNMC is extracting CDMV3 directly from our standards-based i2b2  metadata but 
we want to be team players and also install i2b2 metadata that will allow us to 
respond to  GPC queries from i2b2.  So I am asking for a stake-in-the-sand 
agreement among our net collaborators as to what metadata we will all deploy 
for that purpose, and if SCILHS - are we agreeing on 2.02?

Jim

________________________________
From: Dan Connolly [[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2016 3:08 PM
To: McClay, James C; Campbell, James R
Cc: [email protected]; Brittany Zschoche
Subject: SCILHS i2b2 ontology [was: 8.24.16 GPC Site PM Notes]

What about the ontology, Dr. Campbell?

Reminder from March 
4<redir.aspx?REF=djVwMB-jeCsqlJANz0wEv6nXq5QSEZdkKlJ9CgtcDBhuYmKYJ9DTCAFodHRwOi8vbGlzdHNlcnYua3VtYy5lZHUvcGlwZXJtYWlsL2dwYy1kZXYvMjAxNnExLzAwMjU5NC5odG1s>:
it's best to start the discussion in substance in email, leaving aside the 
question of whether we'll talk about it on a phone call. If, when you see the 
agenda come out, you don't see your item on it and you're not satisfied with 
the email discussion, you can always ask for it to be added.
--
Dan

________________________________
From: [email protected] [[email protected]] on 
behalf of Brittany Zschoche [[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2016 1:35 PM
To: 'McClay, James C'
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: 8.24.16 GPC Site PM Notes

Thanks, Jim.

Dan, please see below.

From: McClay, James C [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2016 12:55 PM
To: Brittany Zschoche <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: 8.24.16 GPC Site PM Notes

Brittany,
Dr. Campbell would like to put a discussion of SCILHS i2b2 ontology on the 
GPC-DEV call this Tuesday.
jm


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

Reply via email to