Thanks Diego, I think you expressed what I was trying to say much more clearly!!
I would also add that opinions about what is the 'right' code can differ substantially between the terminology experts!! Ian Dr Ian McNicoll mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859 office +44 (0)1536 414994 skype: ianmcnicoll email: i...@freshehr.com twitter: @ianmcnicoll Co-Chair, openEHR Foundation ian.mcnic...@openehr.org Director, freshEHR Clinical Informatics Ltd. Director, HANDIHealth CIC Hon. Senior Research Associate, CHIME, UCL On Mon, 27 Aug 2018 at 12:15, Diego Boscá <yamp...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello Georg, > > Defining bindings has been a topic of discussion for many years. I would > say that term bindings (bindings to the labels of the nodes in the > archetype) are more difficult than the constraint bindings (bindings to a > subset of valid terms). This is mostly because when creating "label" > bindings most of the time the meaning of a given item in snomed (e.g. blood > pressure) is not exactly the same as "measure of a blood pressure". Some > countries such as Spain have gone the other way around by defining Snomed > codes in the extension with the meaning provided by the archetype element > itself. Other standards bodies use Loinc with this same principle. > > Also, using wrong codes is quite easy if you are not aware of the Snomed > hierarchy (specimen vs procedure, etc.) > > Regards > > El lun., 27 ago. 2018 a las 13:03, Georg Fette (< > georg.fe...@uni-wuerzburg.de>) escribió: > >> Hello, >> When looking at the published archetypes in the international CKM I see >> a lot of archetype members that do not have a terminology binding, but >> which could possibly have one. The "Body Surface Area" for example has a >> member "Body Surface Area" which has no bound code but could have the >> Snomed Code 128178001. Or "Blood Pressure" has terminology bindings for >> its members "Systolic" and "Diastolic", but not for the "Mean arterial >> pressure". Is there a reason for those non existing bindings or is it >> just because the bindings have not yet been needed and so nobody added >> them yet ? >> Greetings >> Georg >> >> -- >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Dipl.-Inf. Georg Fette Raum: B001 >> Universität Würzburg Tel.: +49-(0)931-31-85516 >> Am Hubland Fax.: +49-(0)931-31-86732 >> 97074 Würzburg mail: georg.fe...@uni-wuerzburg.de >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> openEHR-clinical mailing list >> openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org >> >> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org >> > > > -- > > [image: VeraTech for Health SL] <https://htmlsig.com/t/000001C268PZ> > > [image: Twitter] <https://htmlsig.com/t/000001C47QQH> [image: LinkedIn] > <https://htmlsig.com/t/000001C4DPJG> [image: Maps] > <https://htmlsig.com/t/000001BZTWS7> > > Diego Boscá Tomás / Senior developer > diebo...@veratech.es > yamp...@gmail.com > > VeraTech for Health SL > +34 654604676 > www.veratech.es > > Su dirección de correo electrónico junto a sus datos personales forman > parte de un fichero titularidad de VeraTech for Health SL (CIF B98309511) > cuya finalidad es la de mantener el contacto con usted. Conforme a La Ley > Orgánica 15/1999, usted puede ejercitar sus derechos de acceso, > rectificación, cancelación y, en su caso oposición, enviando una solicitud > por escrito a verat...@veratech.es. > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-clinical mailing list > openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org > > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org >
_______________________________________________ openEHR-clinical mailing list openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org
