An alternative for dealing with semantic in archetypes is dealing with semantics in coding systems like SNOMED.
The consequence is that SNOMED must be a complete Medicinal Product Formulary. I have doubts whether this is a good idea. Many countries have different specific formularies. I like to reserve SNOMED-CT to use as any dictionary with universal lemma’s, concepts. Each country will have its own maintained Formulary. A formulary that changes because of the marketing whims of pharmaceutical companies. Gerard Freriks +31 620347088 [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > On 19 mei 2016, at 10:09, Ian McNicoll <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Thomas, > > In the UK (and ? Aus/NZ), we would not use arbitrary units in UCUM for dose > units because the latter are expressed as SNOMED terms, and are used in > conjunction with the SNOMED-based dm+d (or AMT) drug dictionary to compute > actual doses/amounts where possible. > > e.g. > > 318421004 | Atenolol 100mg tablets | > > via dm+d allows us to infer that 1 tab (in this case) = 100mg > > http://dmd.medicines.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?VMP=318421004&toc=nofloat > <http://dmd.medicines.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?VMP=318421004&toc=nofloat> > > and allows us to do maximum daily dose calculation, at least against a > defined subset of such 'dose units'. > > in other cases the dose unit strength will be defined as part of the > medication order - we have a 'Strength' element in the medication order > archetype for just such a purpose. > > I don't think we need to be able to define the unit strength as part of the > quantity datatype. > > Ian > > Dr Ian McNicoll > mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859 > office +44 (0)1536 414994 > skype: ianmcnicoll > email: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > twitter: @ianmcnicoll > > > Co-Chair, openEHR Foundation [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > Director, freshEHR Clinical Informatics Ltd. > Director, HANDIHealth CIC > Hon. Senior Research Associate, CHIME, UCL > > On 19 May 2016 at 08:24, Thomas Beale <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > Hi Gerard, > they actually could be, but whenever this discussion comes up, no-one > proposes it. I'm not sure if I would either, because these arbitrary units > are still not computable in general, but 'dose units' can be made computable > but only with some extra data fields, i.e. you need both the quantity of dose > in 1 tablet/capsule etc, and also number of tablet/capsule etc. So the > structural model is different anyway. > > I think the other problem with using UCUM arbitrary units is that people / > orgs want to control the names of medicinal delivery products ('tablet' etc) > in a terminology, which is reasonable, but doesn't fit so well with UCUM. > > - thomas > > On 19/05/2016 08:11, "Gerard Freriks (privé)" wrote: >> Thomas, >> >> All are Units of a different kind. >> >> SI defines: Units of Measure, and Units of Quantity in the scientific domain. >> >> There are also Units of Time: minute, hour, etc. >> >> When I think of tablets, capsule, etc. we will call these Units of Medicinal >> Product Dose. >> Isn’t in UCUM this an example of Arbitrary Units? >> <>3.2 >> ARBITRARY UNITS >> <>§24 arbitrary units ■1 Arbitrary or procedure defined units are >> units whose meaning entirely depends on the measurement procedure (assay). >> These units have no general meaning in relation with any other unit in the >> SI. Therefore those arbitrary semantic entities are called arbitrary units, >> as opposed to proper units. The set of arbitrary units is denoted A, where >> A∩ U = {}. ■2 An arbitrary unit has no further definition in the semantic >> framework of The Unified Code for Units of Measure ■3 Arbitrary units are >> not “of any specific dimension” and are not “commensurable with” any other >> unit. >> >> Until version 1.6 The Unified Code for Units of Measure has dealt with >> arbitrary units as dimensionless, but as an effect the semantics of The >> Unified Code for Units of Measure made all arbitrary units commensurable. >> Since version 1.7 of The Unified Code for Units of Measure it is no longer >> possible to convert or compare arbitrary units with any other arbitrary unit. >> >> <>§25 operations on arbitrary units ■1 Any term involving arbitrary >> units, is itself an arbitrary unit and is not comparable with any other >> arbitrary unit or term. >> >> <>§26 definition of arbitrary units ■1 Arbitrary units are marked in >> the definition tables for unit atoms by a bullet (‘•’) in the column titled >> “value” and a bullet in the column titled “definition”. >> >> >> >> Gerard Freriks >> +31 620347088 <tel:%2B31%20620347088> >> <mailto:[email protected]>[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org > <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org> > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
_______________________________________________ openEHR-technical mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
