Thanks Thomas, What are your thoughts on the AQL example I foolishly guessed at :( and that Seref quite correctly rejected!!
How would/should we do... Select all compositions referenced by Folder x. How else might we meet Dileep's use-case with AQL? 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 Fri, 17 Aug 2018 at 17:00, Thomas Beale <thomas.be...@openehr.org> wrote: > > The easiest way to think about this question is: if someone trashed the > Folder structure, could we (some admin app) rebuild it? The answer is > interesting. It should normally be possible to rebuild the Folder / > Composition association structure (it's not containment, just referencing), > but of course, if you stored other information in the Folders, for example > in the recently SEC-approved other_details structure, then you would lose > that. > > So the Folder approach does two things: > > - represents a pre-built query result (the Folder/Composition > associations) - giving instant access, and avoiding having to construct the > query, which is usually somewhat messy. > - allows other information to be stored directly about the thing the > Folder represents, e.g. admission / stay in a facility. > > - thomas > > On 17/08/2018 16:20, Seref Arikan wrote: > > Hi Ian, > > When the fact that the Composition is associated to an encounter or > episode of care is recorded by including a reference to that composition in > a folder, some clinical context/information related to that composition is > now stored outside the composition, by means of a refence in a folder > > Unless I'm missing an Aql feature that can help, you can no longer select > those compositions via Aql (since Aql does not support/specify how to > resolve refs) > > If you follow the encounter id approach you mentioned, then you could use > Aql. > > In fact, if Ethercis had support for Folder, Dileep would still not be > able to get those compositions with a singl query: he'd need to fetchs uids > from a folder with one query, then perform a second query to get > compositions in the way I suggested. > > I'm probably being unnecessarily picky here, just pointing at the > difference between approaches and trying to put my finger on any downstream > issues. I'm not doing a great job of it though :) > > On Friday, August 17, 2018, Ian McNicoll <i...@freshehr.com> wrote: > >> Hi Seref, >> >> I'm not sure I understand your concerns here. I think the use case is >> where there is a need to group compositions by some other higher level >> construct which usually reflect something like an admission, episode of >> outpatient care or perhaps a community plan of care. >> >> As Dileep has indicated he probably would use folders if Ethercis >> supported them. Another alternative is to create an Encounter ID for each >> new encounter (which in Dileep's example, I think I would call an episode >> of care, and simply tag each composition with that Encounter ID e.g create >> a cluster archetype to hold this in every Composition/ other_context. I >> have done that on other projects. So it is a case of looking of all >> composition with EncounterId = x >> Now I would probably go down the Folder route, if I could. >> 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 Fri, 17 Aug 2018 at 13:59, Seref Arikan < >> serefari...@kurumsalteknoloji.com> wrote: >> >>> I'm used to thinking compositions as semantcally self contained units of >>> information, at the very least using references to other means of >>> expressing semantics (as in terminologies) >>> >>> What you're describing seems to take some clincal semantics out of the >>> composion and if we have multiple ways of doing that, it may hurt >>> reusability of queries and data. >>> >>> Do you think we can find a way of expressing this semantcs without >>> losing its trace within the cmposition? >>> >>> (Sorry for the typos, on the phone..) >>> >>> On Friday, August 17, 2018, Thomas Beale <thomas.be...@openehr.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> There is a bigger question of how best to model 'encounter' and >>>> 'admission', which some implementers are doing with Folders, particularly >>>> DIPS in Norway. I suspect that some version of using Folders (or else some >>>> kind of tagging, which is semantically equivalent) will be the long term >>>> approach to doing this. >>>> >>>> - thomas >>>> >>>> On 17/08/2018 10:54, Dileep V S wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Can you write an AQL to query only on a list of specific compositions? >>>> Is there any sample for reference? >>>> >>>> I am trying to create the concept of clinical encounters and maintain a >>>> collection of compositions per encounter. I am using AQL to retrieve data >>>> per encounter and need to pass the corresponding set of compositions. >>>> >>>> Thanks in advance >>>> >>>> regards >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Thomas Beale >>>> Principal, Ars Semantica <http://www.arssemantica.com> >>>> Consultant, ABD Project, Intermountain Healthcare >>>> <https://intermountainhealthcare.org/> >>>> Management Board, Specifications Program Lead, openEHR Foundation >>>> <http://www.openehr.org> >>>> Chartered IT Professional Fellow, BCS, British Computer Society >>>> <http://www.bcs.org/category/6044> >>>> Health IT blog <http://wolandscat.net/> | Culture blog >>>> <http://wolandsothercat.net/> | The Objective Stance >>>> <https://theobjectivestance.net/> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> openEHR-technical mailing list >>> openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org >>> >>> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org >>> >> > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing > listopenEHR-technical@lists.openehr.orghttp://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org > > > -- > Thomas Beale > Principal, Ars Semantica <http://www.arssemantica.com> > Consultant, ABD Project, Intermountain Healthcare > <https://intermountainhealthcare.org/> > Management Board, Specifications Program Lead, openEHR Foundation > <http://www.openehr.org> > Chartered IT Professional Fellow, BCS, British Computer Society > <http://www.bcs.org/category/6044> > Health IT blog <http://wolandscat.net/> | Culture blog > <http://wolandsothercat.net/> | The Objective Stance > <https://theobjectivestance.net/> > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org > > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org >
_______________________________________________ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
