Russ, Brad, w.r.t. figure figure 4 of our proposal, what is "NLP derived concepts"?
http://frontiersresearch.org/frontiers/sites/default/files/Phase%20II%20Proposal.pdf -- Dan ________________________________ From: Dan Connolly Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2017 12:24 PM To: Russ Waitman; Taylor, Bradley Cc: <gpc-dev@listserv.kumc.edu> Subject: unstructured text notes: refining the target (#431) Russ, Brad (when you get back), I'd like to get a few concrete use cases as targets for this deliverable so that we can get tangible experience with what's required and what would be nice-to-have. MCW and IU both report trying the approach of de-identifying all their notes and putting them in i2b2 and coming to the conclusion that it was unwieldy. MCW now does de-identification on a cohort by cohort basis. I'm not sure how to characterize the IU approach. The cohort-by-cohort basis suffices for GPC needs, as far as I can tell. For example: suppose investigators specify, in their GPC DROC request, that progress notes are part of the data that they want. Then each site runs their cohort query and delivers notes for that cohort. The MCW process should work well as a recommended method but other methods would be acceptable if a site (such as IU) already has a suitable process. Perhaps one concrete case would be: progress notes for the ALS cohort, since it's small, then try the breast cancer cohort. Or are there other cohorts where we have a customer demand for notes? For reference: #431<https://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/ticket/431> -- Dan
_______________________________________________ Gpc-dev mailing list Gpc-dev@listserv.kumc.edu http://listserv.kumc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gpc-dev
