Re: SNOMED in CKM

Hi Gerard, I don't have a strong opinion on that area, we have too many cases to state MUST rules that might apply just to a subset of cases. I think a more generic rule is to use term / concept codes that are at the *semantic level* of the archetype node being defined / disambiguated. If a

Re: SNOMED in CKM

Take into account I differentiate "name" from "code". Ian is referring to that I think. Terminology id should use the code, not the name IMHO. Erik in the other thread shared a nice reference using URIs as codes (ids really). On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 3:27 AM, Bert Verhees

Re: SNOMED in CKM

When we have a DvCodedText and we want to express a List Of Values with term-bindings, then we need SNOMED post-coordination in term-bindings. Example: Excision of lymph node: Procedure context (attribute) 58347006:408730004=410534003 <-- Not indicated 58347006:408730004=262008008 <-- Not

Re: SNOMED in CKM

That is correct Bert, There is no need to remove the SNOMED CT bindings from the archetypes. 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

Re: SNOMED in CKM

On 25-04-17 09:42, Diego Boscá wrote: For interoperability, we need to tell more things from a terminology that are nowadays still not possible: terminology version, date, license, probably oid, etc. Is more important to know the exact version (which would solve the 'name' problem) That is

Re: SNOMED in CKM

On 25-04-17 09:32, Ian McNicoll wrote: Hi Bert, SNOMED CT Licensing re openEHR is under active discussion with SNOMED. The principle will be that archetypes or templates containing SNOMED CT codes can be freely used within systems, unless the system actually uses SNOMED CT codes in the

Re: SNOMED in CKM

Pablo, I agree. Attaching codes to nodes in the archetype is in order to disambiguate that archetype node concept/name. In addition. I think that we should NOT use SNOMED-CT codes for that purpose. As far as I know this is the realm of LOINC. So we need LOINC codes to disambiguate nodes in an

Re: SNOMED in CKM

For interoperability, we need to tell more things from a terminology that are nowadays still not possible: terminology version, date, license, probably oid, etc. Is more important to know the exact version (which would solve the 'name' problem) Regards 2017-04-25 8:27 GMT+02:00 Bert Verhees

Re: SNOMED in CKM

Hi Bert, SNOMED CT Licensing re openEHR is under active discussion with SNOMED. The principle will be that archetypes or templates containing SNOMED CT codes can be freely used within systems, unless the system actually uses SNOMED CT codes in the patient data i.e as part of a defining_code or

Re: SNOMED in CKM

Pablo, you are allowed to use the SNOMED browser, even if you do not have a license, you get a temporary license to use SNOMED, here are some conditions (the important point) When you use SNOMED in terminology binding in an archetype, how did you find that SNOMED code? I think point 4b is

Re: SNOMED in CKM

Hi Ian, not to be troublesome, but wouldn't it be better, for interoperability, to use the name IHTSDO uses. I think Pablo has a point here. Bert Op 25-4-2017 om 08:20 schreef Ian McNicoll: Hi Bert, The official name that SNOMED/IHTSDO use is 'SNOMED CT'. The technical terminology

Re: SNOMED in CKM

Hi Bert, The official name that SNOMED/IHTSDO use is 'SNOMED CT'. The technical terminology descriptor that we use inside terminology_id is 'SNOMED-CT' Ian On Tue, 25 Apr 2017 at 08:03, Bert Verhees wrote: > I thought so too, I even asked someone at ihtsdo but when you

Re: SNOMED in CKM

I thought so too, I even asked someone at ihtsdo but when you read the license coming with the SNOMED-CT browser, it made me doubt. Take a look at it yourself, I believe it is point 4 ( I am on my mobile right now and it is inconvenient to look now) Bert Op di 25 apr. 2017 06:59 schreef Pablo

Re: SNOMED in CKM

In terms of license, I don't think using archetypes that reference snomed is a problem. The thing is when you want to support snomed in your system, having or not archetypes doesn't makes the difference IMO. On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 1:39 AM, Bert Verhees wrote: > But I

Re: SNOMED in CKM

But I think that it is not allowed to use SNOMED-CT in bindings when you're not explicitly permitted to do so. Bert Op di 25 apr. 2017 06:34 schreef Bert Verhees : > I agree completely with you, Pablo > > Best regards > Bert > > Op di 25 apr. 2017 06:24 schreef Pablo Pazos

Re: SNOMED in CKM

Op 17-4-2017 om 23:57 schreef Pablo Pazos: Currently the use of specific SNOMED CT codes in archetypes is for further definition / specification of the clinical concepts. To use SNOMED CT at runtime, external constraints are used in the form of URIs, that might point to a SNOMED domain or

Re: SNOMED in CKM

Currently the use of specific SNOMED CT codes in archetypes is for further definition / specification of the clinical concepts. To use SNOMED CT at runtime, external constraints are used in the form of URIs, that might point to a SNOMED domain or specific subset. If the subset is local, the

Re: SNOMED in CKM

Op 12-4-2017 om 12:01 schreef Ian McNicoll: Having said that, my understanding is that SNOMED are very willing to be generous in terms of vendor/org level licensing in such a situation. I know that they have a license for organizations in a country which is a non-member. And for one

Re: SNOMED in CKM

The challenge there will be if you decide as an organisation that e.g. SNOMED mappings should be recorded as a default. That would breach the licence agreement we will have with SNOMED, where e.g Germany does not have a national affiliate licence. Having said that, my understanding is that SNOMED

Re: SNOMED in CKM

Thanks Ian. This explains very well what we (in the Netherlands) need to do when "running" archetypes in Germany (which is non-member-country) I think it is also good for others which use CKM, to realize that, if appropriate. Bert Op 12-4-2017 om 11:22 schreef Ian McNicoll: Hi Bert, This

Re: SNOMED in CKM

Hi Bert, This is a good and timely post. We are just finalising an Affiliate License agreement with SNOMED. It has not been formally signed off but the broad approach is that we are allowed to put SNOMED bindings in archetypes as long as it is made clear to users of those archetypes that they

Re: SNOMED in CKM

Op 12-4-2017 om 10:56 schreef Bert Verhees: Hi, I needed to clean up archetypes from SNOMED bindings because of license-reasons, I "grepped" the local directory from CKM. To my surprise I found there SNOMED bindings in over 50 archetypes. I must mitigate that, a part of the 50 are archetypes