Hello Tim,
Tuesday, February 21, 2006, 8:36:58 PM, you wrote: TC> Andrew McIntyre wrote: >> Hello Tim, >> >> OK, you can arrow down and select the appropriate concept. Really you >> need 2 words or a very complex word or its to vague for a search. Its >> also essential to restrict the top level concept to a defined parent, >> such as procedure or clinical finding, as a minimum. TC> Um, the attached screenshot shows a tree list of terms containing TC> duodenal. Am I right in thinking that one needs to chose various TC> restrictions as you describe before typing some words to look up? Not TC> quite what I had in mind... No, that's in code, behind the scenes. You need to know what sort of values you want in the field, which you would, in the example its a "Clinical finding" rather than a procedure. In general you want to know what type of code you want in a field, or you may make a nonsensical statement. In this case I typed "Duodenal Ulcer" and the list popped up. >> Restricting the search is vital as there are 2 many concepts >> otherwise. TC> The trick, Andrew, is to sort the choices by likelihood of being the TC> correct choice. Well if I type "duodenal ulcer" as the free text the choices look pretty correct to me. >> We use some complexity testing before we do a background >> search. Archetypes are excellent for restricting the query. TC> Complexity testing? You've lost me there? Something to do with teh TC> entropy of the words (as in password complexity testing)? Yes, if you type "Ulcer" as a search term then there are to many possible choices, if you type "Thrombocytopenia" or "Choledocholithiasis" then a search is worth a go. Finding a reliable rule for this is something that needs some more R&D. Typing "Duodenal ulcer" seems good enough to get a reasonable pick list in this case. Its also what people are likely to call it. Exploring some natural language Processing here is likely to help also. There are 2 snomed CT coding schools however - The "choice restrainers" and the "Natural Language Processing" camp. I probably lean to the former, while wanting to leverage the later. Its a bit like google, typing "and" is not going to get you very far (NASA interestingly!) The aim of archetypes is to restrict choices for you (You don't have to type them in, they are in the ADL) That way if you choose a report about eg Cholecystectomy, you are not shown concepts about colectomy or cystoscopy or rabies. If people are presented with a reasonable list of choices they might use it. Browsing raw snomed for a term is not practical, you also need to be sure that you are choosing a concept from the correct branch of snomed-CT. We are looking for Name=Value Pairs and unless you choose from the correct branch you may end up with Value=name, name=name or value=value. Snomed-CT has a lot of ip behind it, its not just a "Big List" and you can do some really complex things with it, but it does take some investment in time to understand it, I am certainly still learning, but its impressive, if a little flawed in areas. Snomed-CT are aware of some of the flaws and its evolving and improving with time. It seems its going to come to Australia so we may as well use it to its fullest advantage. An Australian Medication extension would be nice. TC> Tim C >> Tuesday, February 21, 2006, 4:22:38 PM, you wrote: >> >> TC> Andrew McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> Hello Tim, >>>> >>>> TC> Having seen your demo, I still think that the dream of a mechanism >>>> TC> in which the GP types the first few characters of each term into a >>>> TC> text box and the system provides an intelligent set of guesses >>>> TC> about whcih SCT concept (or English language word) was intended >>>> TC> and auto-completes it for him/her is feasible. >>>> >>>> You can stop dreaming, its done ;-) >> >> TC> Andrew, >> >> TC> Jolly good, show us! >> >> TC> Tim C >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gpcg_talk mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk -- Best regards, Andrew mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Andrew McIntyre Buderim Gastroenterology Centre www.buderimgastro.com.au PH: 07 54455055 FAX: 54455047 _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
