Tim Churches wrote: > Sam Heard <sam.heard at bigpond.com> wrote: > > > > TEXTURAL RESULTS TO QUANTITIES > > ?TEXTUAL? > > This raises the general issue of how mixed categorical/ordinal/scalar quantities > are handled eg (made up example) haematuria: Trace->x RBC/ml -> Gross > haematuria. Conceivably some use might be made of the numbers, as opposed > to the ordinal categorical extrema?
The current DV_ORDINAL data type consists of an integer value representing the ordinal position in a range of values, and a symbol, which is the symbol given to that position. Ordinals are treated as being comparable (< operator is defined) but not quantified (the magnitude is unknown). We currently think that the correct way to express the symbol is as a term in a vocabulary (maybe subsetted). This means that each set of symbols comes from its own micro-vocabulary, and even if the same symbols (like "trace", "+", "++") are used for unrelated things, they cannot get mixed up in comparisons. Examles: pain: Value Symbol 1 + 2 ++ 3 +++ reflex Value Symbol 1 + 2 ++ 3 +++ haemolysed blood in urinalysis 1 ?neg? 2 ?trace? 3 ?small? 4 ?moderate? 5 ?large? OR - haemolysed blood in urinalysis (unit=cells/ml) 1 ?neg? 2 ?trace (10)" 3 ?small (<25)" 4 ?moderate (<80)" 5 ?large (>200)" I am not sure if we need more sophistication to deal with this. The main problem I see is the lack of vocabularies, and/or non-standardisation of them. I guess LOINC has the kinds of values we want, but how to specify the correct subsets? - thomas beale - If you have any questions about using this list, please send a message to d.lloyd at openehr.org
