Further to may last post, I checked the AOM and it appears that ISO codes
may be used as terminology values e.g. for SNOMED-CT:
terminologies_available = <"2.16.840.1.113883.6.5", "LNC205">
???????????????????????
term_binding=<
["2.16.840.1.113883.6.5"] = <
??????????????????????????????????? items = <
["at0000"] =
<[2.16.840.1.113883.6.5::12345]>
???????????????????????????????????????? >
??????????????????????? >
???????????????????? ["LNC205"] = <
??????????????????????????????????? items = <
??????????????????????????????????????????????? ["at0004"] =
<[LNC205::121457]>
??????????????????????????????????? >
??????????????????????? >
>
From: Williamtfgoossen at cs.com [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: 15 December 2006 14:30
To: openehr-technical at openehr.org
Subject: Antw: Suggestions re Term binding in Archetype Editor
In een bericht met de datum 15-12-2006 14:40:59 West-Europa (standaardtijd),
schrijft ian at mcmi.co.uk:
Hi,
I am currently working my way slowly through the Scottish Cardiac dataset,
converting it to archetypes as proof-of-concept, using the OE editor.
Term binding (to SNOMED) will be a crucial aspect from our perspective,
especially binding local (interface) terms to SNOMED concepts.
This would be much easier within the editor if the Term bindings screen
displayed the node name as well as the Node ID, as it is easy to forget
which local term you are trying to bind by the time you have rummaged around
in Snomed for a bit!!. The "Choose Nodes" dialog might also be a little
easier if the Node parent name and Node name were included. When only the
node name is visible this can cause confusion if similar local terms are
used for different nodes e.g. "Not known".
Finally in the ADL, I think it would be very helpful to be able to include
the text of the Bound term text as well as its code. This would allow much
easier checking for errors and documenting
I have done this by enclosing the bound term text in [] for now.
e.g.
term_binding = <
???????["SNOMED-CT"] = <
???????????items = <
???????????????["at0000"] = <[SNOMED-CT::229819007 [Tobacco
use and Exposure]]>
???????????????["at0006"] = <[SNOMED-CT::?Non Tobacco
user]>
???????????????["at0009"] = <[SNOMED-CT::]>
???????????????["at0011"] = <[SNOMED-CT::[Ex-smoker]
8517006]>
???????????????["at0012"] = <[SNOMED-CT::[Current
non-smoker] 160618006]>
Regards,
Ian
I agree with Ian's requirements, however would like to add.
In our experience some clinical materials are that detailed that not all
terms can be coded with Snomed CT terms, and waiting for additions is not
always possible. In such a case, or if there are requirements to work with
other codes (LOINC, ICF) ?I work with multiple code bindings in the same
archetype / template / care information models.
This would add the following 2 requirements:
1. ???identify the code system itself that is used (which Ian alread
presents in its listing/naming ["SNOMED-CT"]
2. ???apply the ISO unique identifier for the coding system used. For snomed
CT this would be: 2.16.840.1.113883.6.5
I am not fully familiar with the notations in the archetype, but it could
look like this
term_binding = <
???????[2.16.840.1.113883.6.5:: Display name is: SNOMED-CT"] = <
???????????items = <
???????????????["at0000"] = <[SNOMED-CT::229819007 [Tobacco
use and Exposure]]>
where the number is the identifier and Snomed-CT the name of the terminology
system(s) applied.
Similarly the ICF binding could then reside in the same archetype.
term_binding = <
???????[2.16.840.1.113883.6.*****:: Display name is: ICF"] = <
???????????items = <
???????????????["at0023"] = <[ICF::d3151 [Understanding general signs and
symbols]]>
(as far as I know there is no ISO OID for ICF at this stage, or if anyone
knows it and can give the source, I would be happy).
William Goossen
_______________________________________________
openEHR-technical mailing list
openEHR-technical at openehr.org
http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
