For the GPC SHRINE, the approach of starting without modifiers, then adding them later seems appropriate. I¹d rather have some data available in SHRINE, then none.
For the modifiers, at UTSW, we simply added our local modifiers under the SCILHS modifiers. So, the ³Primary² modifier had all of the various billing, claims, encounter, professions, etc. primary modifiers. We did the same for the other modifiers as best we could as well. If you are using the GPC modifiers in your local data, it¹s possible we could share this mapping across GPC sites to have better alignment of the modifiers. And it would allow you to support the SHRINE PCORI modifiers with little local effort. Phillip On 11/2/17, 12:35 PM, "Gpc-dev on behalf of GPC Informatics" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: >#90: Diagnoses Modifiers for data attribution >--------------------------+---------------------------- > Reporter: campbell | Owner: astoddard > Type: design-issue | Status: assigned > Priority: major | Milestone: snow-shrine-2 >Component: data-stds | Resolution: > Keywords: | Blocked By: > Blocking: 411 | >--------------------------+---------------------------- > >Comment (by astoddard): > > MCW has not implemented the PCORnet CDM build from i2b2 (i2p-transform). > We are not alone in this. Non i2p-transform sites will all likely have > higher costs for getting PCORnet/ SCILHS / ARCH modifiers properly >aligned > in i2b2. > > Going without modifiers we can expose the diagnosis ontology in SHRINE > trivially within a few days. > > I estimate implementing the modifiers for diagnosis in our i2b2 is a week > of dedicated work for MCW. Scheduling that with existing priorities, the > need to bring new team members up to speed, and coordinating with >internal > data release schedules means actual availability of PCORnet modified > diagnosis queries in MCW Shrine is likely to be early Jan 2018. > > There remains some ambiguity to resolve on PCORnet /ARCH / SCILHS >modifier > use - eg. the PDX axis which is "Principle Discharge Diagnosis" in CDM3.x > and defined to only be relevant to inpatient encounters but is called > "Primary Diagnosis Flag" in the ontology itself and could be expected to > apply more widely as a result. > > Even i2b2 deployments that sit upstream of PCORnet CDM builds may not >have > modifier use perfectly aligned, the CDM spec itself is vague at times, >and > I would be unsurprised if some post-processing of CDMs will have happened > in order to pass data-checks. > > MCW's preference is to make un-modified SHRINE ontology queries available > across procedure and diagnosis domains early and then improve on that. > >-- >Ticket URL: ><http://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/ticket/90#comment:42> >gpc-informatics <http://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/> >Greater Plains Network - Informatics >_______________________________________________ >Gpc-dev mailing list >[email protected] >http://listserv.kumc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gpc-dev ________________________________ UT Southwestern Medical Center The future of medicine, today. _______________________________________________ Gpc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://listserv.kumc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gpc-dev
