I retrieved our ETL for encounters and summarize the classification of AV and
OA visit types based upon our visit categorization code in our instance of Epic:
AV(we used ambulatory face-to-face clinical)
Type codes 51,104-Ambulatory surgery visits; 101-Office visits;
1003-Ambulatory procedure visit; 2100-Surgical consults;1000-Ambulatory
consults;11-Research encounters; 1201-Prenatal visits
OA(non-face to face encounters)
70-Telephone calls,107-Prescription refills,1001-Coagulation
visits,71-Call center nurse triage,1200-Routine prenatal(oops?),202-Social work
visits,209-Education visits,2524-Nursing home visit(oops?),61-Email
encounters,1214-Postpartum visit,2523-Home visit,2522-Telehealth,201-Nurse
only,108-Shot visit(immunization),203-Nutrition visit,81-Ophthalmology
exam(oops?),91-Home care visit
Everything else other than EI, ED, IP and IS will end up as OT.
Any other site that has an Epic contract, I can give you the SQL or we posted
on the userweb last fall.
Jim Campbell
From: Gpc-dev [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mei Liu
Sent: Monday, March 27, 2017 11:41 AM
To: '[email protected]' <[email protected]>
Subject: NextD - question about data reported in EDC to PCORnet
Do any GPC sites other than KUMC can share how they mapped their hospital
visits to PCORnet AV, OA, etc.?
Thanks,
Mei
From: Dan Connolly
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 4:04 PM
To: Mei Liu; Russ Waitman
Cc: Brittany Zschoche
Subject: RE: NextD - question about data reported in EDC to PCORnet
#2 looks like the same question we discussed in the "AV vs OA trends" thread
with Alona. Does my answer there about
pcornet_mapping.csv<https://github.com/kumc-bmi/i2p-transform/blob/master/Oracle/pcornet_mapping.csv>
and such suffice?
--
Dan
________________________________
From: Mei Liu
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 3:54 PM
To: Dan Connolly; Russ Waitman
Cc: Brittany Zschoche
Subject: RE: NextD - question about data reported in EDC to PCORnet
Dan, would you know the answer to question #2?
Mei
From: Dan Connolly
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 3:51 PM
To: Mei Liu; Russ Waitman
Cc: Brittany Zschoche
Subject: RE: NextD - question about data reported in EDC to PCORnet
The redcap project where we collected the EDC report captured a contact person
for each submission. That's the person to ask.
--
Dan
________________________________
From: Mei Liu
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 12:28 PM
To: Dan Connolly; Russ Waitman
Cc: Brittany Zschoche
Subject: NextD - question about data reported in EDC to PCORnet
Hi Dan and Russ,
For the NextD project, NU compared the time trends in visit rates for GPC
sites to theirs (see graph in attached doc). Two questions came up.
1. Data anomaly - specifically Indiana and UTSW reports had spikes in
their data that might be a data problem. Where does it come from?
2. Across sites, very different patterns for the proportions of different
visit *types* are seen (see table in attached doc). KUMC has 28.3% "ambulatory
visits" but 0% for "other ambulatory". Why do we have so many nulls in "other
ambulatory"? How was AV vs. OA coded? What assumptions were made during the
translation from i2b2 to CDM?
Bernie has contacted Dan Hood directly regarding Indiana's data. Is Phillip
Reeder the person I should contact at UTSW regarding the data problem?
Thank you!
Mei
-------------------------------------------------
Mei Liu, PhD
Assistant Professor
Department of Internal Medicine
Division of Medical Informatics
University of Kansas Medical Center
Office: 913-945-6446
Fax: 913-588-4880
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
