Hi,
Maybe SNOMED International's document "Guidance on use of SNOMED CT and LOINC
together", http://snomed.org/snomedloinc , could be of interest to some of you?
Regrads
Mikael
Från: openEHR-clinical [mailto:openehr-clinical-boun...@lists.openehr.org] För
GF
Skickat: den 12 mars 2018 12:51
Till: Birger Haarbrandt <birger.haarbra...@plri.de>
Kopia: For openEHR clinical discussions <openehr-clinical@lists.openehr.org>
Ämne: Re: Terminology bindings ... again
Hi,
As far as I remember this separation was the result of agreements between LOINC
and SNOMED.
When I was looking for codes that could be attached to nodes in the archetype I
was referred to LOINC.
SNOMED made it clear that they were not the party that could help me.
In a way it can make sense.
SNOMED has a real ontology behind it. And is using the Open World assumption.
LOINC is NOT an terminology but as I see it a Classification with rules and a
syntax.
LOINC and Archetypes are really Closed World artefacts.
Gerard Freriks
+31 620347088
gf...@luna.nl<mailto:gf...@luna.nl>
Kattensingel 20
2801 CA Gouda
the Netherlands
On 12 Mar 2018, at 09:12, Birger Haarbrandt
<birger.haarbra...@plri.de<mailto:birger.haarbra...@plri.de>> wrote:
Hi Gerard,
are you able to provide more information on the reasoning that led to this
decision? Maybe links to documents or any other insights? This would be quite
interesting for our acitivities in Germany.
Best,
_______________________________________________
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org
