This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
Difference between revisions of "2017-03-14 TermInfo Project Call"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with " * Proposal to take turn on taking notes. Øyvind documents meeting. * FHIR publishing – Rob demonstrated briefly tooling for publishing * Representation for intentional va...") |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
* Representation for intentional value sets. Challenge with implementation of SCT Expression Constraint Language that can be used for describing queries for intentional value set definitions. Useful to know what limitation we have in this work for producing our value sets in FHIR. Example: how to express finding with explicit context but exclude where associated findings are an adminstrative status. Possible requirements for STU 4 to handle this should be identified. Linda provides examples. | * Representation for intentional value sets. Challenge with implementation of SCT Expression Constraint Language that can be used for describing queries for intentional value set definitions. Useful to know what limitation we have in this work for producing our value sets in FHIR. Example: how to express finding with explicit context but exclude where associated findings are an adminstrative status. Possible requirements for STU 4 to handle this should be identified. Linda provides examples. | ||
| − | Discussion on document Using SNOMED CT with HL7 FHIR Resources. | + | '''Discussion on document Using SNOMED CT with HL7 FHIR Resources.''' |
* Update for SNOMED CT concept domain binding based on changes in the last version of FHIR. | * Update for SNOMED CT concept domain binding based on changes in the last version of FHIR. | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
* Disussion on Condition resource – findings minus, minus, minus– ref definition on page 13 | * Disussion on Condition resource – findings minus, minus, minus– ref definition on page 13 | ||
| − | * Clinical status – discussions also on value set in FHIR. Can SNOMED influence the outcome? | + | ** Clinical status – discussions also on value set in FHIR. Can SNOMED influence the outcome? |
* Severity –FHIR 3 points: mild, moderate, severe. SNOMED CT 5 points: mild, moderate, severe vs mild, mild to moderate, moderate, moderate to severe, severe in SNOMED CT No unique defintions of how they can be used consistently. What strategy should be used in harmonizing value sets across FHIR and SNOMED CT. Ex | * Severity –FHIR 3 points: mild, moderate, severe. SNOMED CT 5 points: mild, moderate, severe vs mild, mild to moderate, moderate, moderate to severe, severe in SNOMED CT No unique defintions of how they can be used consistently. What strategy should be used in harmonizing value sets across FHIR and SNOMED CT. Ex | ||
* Stage – limited staging concept in SNOMED CT. | * Stage – limited staging concept in SNOMED CT. | ||
* Manifestational symptom – the same value set as Condition itself. Harmonize with definition of Condition itself? | * Manifestational symptom – the same value set as Condition itself. Harmonize with definition of Condition itself? | ||
Revision as of 14:18, 20 March 2017
- Proposal to take turn on taking notes. Øyvind documents meeting.
- FHIR publishing – Rob demonstrated briefly tooling for publishing
- Representation for intentional value sets. Challenge with implementation of SCT Expression Constraint Language that can be used for describing queries for intentional value set definitions. Useful to know what limitation we have in this work for producing our value sets in FHIR. Example: how to express finding with explicit context but exclude where associated findings are an adminstrative status. Possible requirements for STU 4 to handle this should be identified. Linda provides examples.
Discussion on document Using SNOMED CT with HL7 FHIR Resources.
- Update for SNOMED CT concept domain binding based on changes in the last version of FHIR.
- Walk-through of 5 step value set review process as described in the binding document. .
- Disussion on Condition resource – findings minus, minus, minus– ref definition on page 13
- Clinical status – discussions also on value set in FHIR. Can SNOMED influence the outcome?
- Severity –FHIR 3 points: mild, moderate, severe. SNOMED CT 5 points: mild, moderate, severe vs mild, mild to moderate, moderate, moderate to severe, severe in SNOMED CT No unique defintions of how they can be used consistently. What strategy should be used in harmonizing value sets across FHIR and SNOMED CT. Ex
- Stage – limited staging concept in SNOMED CT.
- Manifestational symptom – the same value set as Condition itself. Harmonize with definition of Condition itself?
