Collabnet Discussions - IPaLM SIG
General Group Notifications
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Invitation to the IHE--HL7 AP – COST Eurotelepath IC0604 Joint meeting Helsinki Aug 27, 2011 (collabnet topic id: topc3627)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Invitation to the IHE/HL7 AP – COST Eurotelepath IC0604 Joint meeting Helsinki Aug 27, 2011 | Please be invited to this open meeting during the European Pathology Congress. Full agenda attached. In particular, please note the Business Modeling and Standards (2:00 PM – 5:30 PM, Aug 27). | alaurinavicius | Wed Aug 17 08:53:55 Z 2011 | post5135 | topc3627 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Meeting scheduling confusion (collabnet topic id: topc7259)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Meeting scheduling confusion | The meeting has concluded for today. Given the number of attendees and other data, we realize that several may have had the meeting scheduled at a different time than what was posted in the agenda. There was a gotomeeting problem which was displaying the incorrect time. We will be sending out the notes and actions this week as well as the agenda for our next meeting. The next meeting will be at 20:00 UTC on November 4th. Gotomeeting and an agenda will follow. Following this meeting, our meetings will occur on the first Tuesday of every odd-numbered month at 20:00 UTC so that you may make recurring appointments in your calendars. Please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, Alexis Carter, MD Chair, IPaLM SIG | acarter | Tue Oct 21 19:36:17 Z 2014 | post10729 | topc7259 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Meeting scheduling confusion | Hi, I was wondering if the meeting for today 20.00 UTC is still on. I'm unable to see the agenda or the GoToMeeting details. Best regards, Farzaneh | fashrafi | Tue Nov 04 16:49:26 Z 2014 | post10757 | topc7259 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Meeting scheduling confusion | My apologies. I have been on clinical service and then out of the office and then on clinical service again currently. Clinical service is extremely heavy (70+ hour work week) for me, so I was not able to get out the agenda or the notes in a timely manner, especially given that this meeting was scheduled very quickly after our last meeting. I propose that we cancel the meeting for today (again apologies), and have our next scheduled meeting in January (January 6 at 20:00 UTC). If there are strong objections to waiting until January, then we will need to schedule a meeting for the first Tuesday in December. Please let me know what you would like to do. Alexis Carter MD IPaLM SIG Chair | acarter | Tue Nov 04 17:10:29 Z 2014 | post10758 | topc7259 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Doodle poll for September IPaLM SIG meeting (collabnet topic id: topc7114)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Doodle poll for September IPaLM SIG meeting | Please indicate your availability for the next IPaLM SIG meeting at the end of September. The minutes from the last meeting have been posted for your review. The link to the doodle scheduling app is below. Please mark your availability no later than Friday, September 12th, at 12 noon UTC (8 am US Eastern Daylight Time). http://doodle.com/csm6kbsv6b57arb8 Thanks and I look forward to speaking with all of you at the end of September. Alexis Carter, MD Chair, IPaLM SIG | acarter | Thu Sep 04 19:00:04 Z 2014 | post10528 | topc7114 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Doodle for IPaLM SIG October Meeting (collabnet topic id: topc7174)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Doodle for IPaLM SIG October Meeting | Please click the link below to indicate your availability for the next IPaLM SIG meeting in October 2014. FOR THOSE OF YOU IN THE USA, the meeting times are accurate and have been scheduled this go round to be conducive for our European colleagues and Sydney colleagues to join us. http://doodle.com/ht7zqdcys8q7b8gm Draft Agenda: 1. Welcome & Apologies 2. Conflicts of Interest 3. Introduction of the IPaLM Vice-Chair 4. Notes and actions from the last meeting 5. Brief review and approval of the IPaLM SIG Terms of Reference (revised from the last meeting) 6. Update on IHTSDO Activities - Further discuss "leukocytes other" and strategy for dealing with LOINC "other" codes as a whole - update on the LOINC project 7. Recruitment of molecular/genomic pathologists to the SIG 8. Any other business 9. Date of next meeting | acarter | Thu Sep 25 02:08:18 Z 2014 | post10601 | topc7174 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Doodle for IPaLM SIG October Meeting | Please note that I need your answers no later than Sunday October 5. http://doodle.com/ht7zqdcys8q7b8gm Thanks, Alexis Carter, MD IPaLM SIG Chair | acarter | Thu Sep 25 02:24:10 Z 2014 | post10602 | topc7174 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Information for upcoming IHTSDO International Pathology and Lab Medicine (IPaLM) SIG meeting on Oct 24 (collabnet topic id: topc5139)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Information for upcoming IHTSDO International Pathology and Lab Medicine (IPaLM) SIG meeting on Oct 24 | Here is the call-in information for the upcoming IHTSDO International Pathology and Lab Medicine (IPaLM) SIG meeting. The meeting will be on Wednesday, October 24th from 13:30-16:30 (local Stockholm time). The passcode will be released at 12:30 that day and will be posted on the IHTSDO website. We are sharing the conference line so the passcode will not be available until the previous meeting ends. Instructions: 1. Use a dial-in number (list below) to dial the IHTSDO Conference System. 2. Choose telephone conference line by pressing 5 3. Enter the pass code : Will be official after 12:30 24th Oct. AUSTRALIA BRISBANE +61 731234424 BELGIUM BRUSSELS +32 78480376 CANADA TORONTO +1 4168000350 CYPRUS NICOSIA +35722030509 DENMARK COPENHAGEN +45 43396372 ESTONIA TALLINN +372 6680309 FINLAND +358942415756 FRANCE PARIS +33 975182170 GERMANY COLOGNE +49 22182829008 HONG KONG +85258083216 ISRAEL JERUSALEM +972 23721117 LITHUANIA VILNIUS +370 52058946 MALTA VALETTA +356 27780172 NETHERLANDS AMSTERDAM +31 202629995 NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND +64 99250305 POLAND WARSAW +48 223070624 SINGAPORE +65 31581162 SPAIN MADRID +34911875628 SWEDEN STOCKHOLM +46 852507971 SWITZERLAND BERN +41 315280363 SLOVENIA LJUBLJANA +38616002717 SLOVAK REPUBLIC BRATISLAVA +421233006932 UNITED KINGDOM BIRMINGHAM +44 1213142062 UNITED STATES CHICAGO +1 3124966622 UNITED STATES LOS ANGELES +1 2133253224 UNITED STATES WASHINGTON +1 2022924256 | markennedy | Mon Oct 22 13:27:05 Z 2012 | post7485 | topc5139 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Information for upcoming IHTSDO International Pathology and Lab Medicine (IPaLM) SIG meeting on Oct 24 | The passcode for today's session is listed below. Please use the dial in number previously posted afternoon session 13:30 - 16:30 Please use passcode: 54362# Thanks! | markennedy | Wed Oct 24 13:41:52 Z 2012 | post7497 | topc5139 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Next IPaLM SIG meeting (collabnet topic id: topc7296)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Next IPaLM SIG meeting | The next meeting of the IPaLM sig. will take place on December 16, 2014, at 2000 UTC. The agenda has been attached to this email and will also be uploaded to the meeting folder on CollabNet. The minutes of the last meeting have also been uploaded to CollabNet. GoToMeeting information will be posted after the IHTSDO has set it up for us. PLEASE NOTE: we do not have the capability to send out appointments at this time given the large number of people in this group, so please make note of this appointment in your calendars. For those in the United States, 2000 UTC is 3:00 PM Eastern time. Sincerely, Alexis Carter, MD Chair, IPaLM SIG | acarter | Tue Nov 18 16:20:12 Z 2014 | post10795 | topc7296 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Meeting Canceled Today (collabnet topic id: topc7395)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Meeting Canceled Today | To the members of the IPaLM SIG: The meeting scheduled for today is canceled. Schools are closed today due to the weather, and I was not able to get an agenda out in time last week because I was on clinical service. We will meet at our scheduled time next month (March). I will get updates out to the group by email hopefully later today. Sincerely, Alexis | acarter | Tue Feb 17 12:46:11 Z 2015 | post10993 | topc7395 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Doodle Poll for August IHTSDO IPaLM conference call (collabnet topic id: topc4914)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Doodle Poll for August IHTSDO IPaLM conference call | Kindly follow the link below to confirm your availability to participate in the IHTSDO IPaLM conference call in August. http://doodle.com/w2tu9qw75wv4px49 Thanks! | markennedy | Tue Aug 14 13:44:04 Z 2012 | post7164 | topc4914 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IPaLM Meeting Agenda 20150421 (collabnet topic id: topc7466)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IPaLM Meeting Agenda 20150421 | Agenda for IPaLM SIG meeting, 20150421 | wscampbell | Wed Apr 15 14:53:57 Z 2015 | post11144 | topc7466 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Invitation to Vote: Vice-Chair for IHTSDO IPaLM SIG (please respond) (collabnet topic id: topc7006)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Invitation to Vote: Vice-Chair for IHTSDO IPaLM SIG (please respond) | Dear IPaLM SIG Member, Following the recent call for nominations for the Vice-Chair of the IPaLM SIG, we were fortunate to receive nominations for two excellent candidates: Archibald Prentice W. Scott Campbell The attachment to this message provides their relevant details. We now invite you (as registered SIG members), to vote for your next Vice-Chair. Please email me directly (at fmc@ihtsdo.org) by Friday 15th of August (21:00 UTC) to indicate which candidate you support. DO NOT reply directly to this message. Many thanks, Fleur McBriar IHTSDO | fgilbert | Fri Aug 08 12:27:46 Z 2014 | post10402 | topc7006 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Availability for Next Conference Call--Needed by June 12th (collabnet topic id: topc4663)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Availability for Next Conference Call--Needed by June 12th | Welcome to the IPaLM poll to determine the date and time of our next conference call. Please click on the link provided and fill in your available dates and times for a one hour conference call. Instructions for completing the poll can be found under "Documents"-> Root Folder. Below is the link for the poll. Please complete your availability by June 12th. http://www.doodle.com/pe8dtaiqdg82i6p4 Thank you! | markennedy | Wed Jun 06 14:03:29 Z 2012 | post6788 | topc4663 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Presentation (collabnet topic id: topc6832)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Presentation | The presentation for SNOMED CT in Anatomic Pathology has been uploaded to CollabNet in the Projects folder --> Synoptic Data incorporation folder. | ydaruis | Fri Jun 13 11:05:43 Z 2014 | post10172 | topc6832 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: REMINDER: Next IPaLM SIG meeting January (collabnet topic id: topc7352)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: REMINDER: Next IPaLM SIG meeting January | This is a reminder that our next IPaLM SIG meeting is on January 20, 2015 at 20:00 UTC. Call in information is below. Meeting information The monthly meeting for the IPaLM SIG is as follows: The 3rd Tuesday of each month 20:00 UTC https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/377960285 Access Code: 377-960-285 You can also dial in using your phone (use the access code referenced just above). Australia (Long distance): +61 2 8355 1024 Denmark: +45 (0) 69 91 88 64 Australia: +61 2 8355 1024 Austria: +43 (0) 7 2088 1403 Belgium: +32 (0) 38 08 1856 Canada: +1 (647) 497-9351 Finland: +358 (0) 942 41 5780 France: +33 (0) 182 880 459 Germany: +49 (0) 692 5736 7312 Ireland: +353 (0) 14 845 978 Italy: +39 0 699 36 98 81 Netherlands: +31 (0) 208 080 381 New Zealand: +64 (0) 9 909 7888 Norway: +47 21 03 58 98 Spain: +34 955 32 0845 Sweden: +46 (0) 852 503 499 Switzerland: +41 (0) 435 0167 09 United Kingdom: +44 (0) 330 221 0086 United States: +1 (619) 550-0006 https://global.gotomeeting.com/377960285/numbersdisplay.html acarter - 01/13/2015 6:29 AM PST | acarter | Tue Jan 13 17:37:08 Z 2015 | post10903 | topc7352 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IPaLM Meeting Agenda 20150317 (collabnet topic id: topc7421)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IPaLM Meeting Agenda 20150317 | Please find attached, the IPaLM meeting agenda for 17-March. | wscampbell | Wed Mar 11 19:08:15 Z 2015 | post11059 | topc7421 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Call for Nominations: Vice-Chair of the IHTSDO IPaLM SIG (collabnet topic id: topc7534)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Call for Nominations: Vice-Chair of the IHTSDO IPaLM SIG | Nominations are invited at this time for the post of Vice-Chair of the IHTSDO International Pathology & Laboratory Medicine (IPaLM) Special Interest Group (SIG). The SIG was established to provide advice on new, as well as updated, pathology content in SNOMED CT, through projects agreed by the IHTSDO Content Committee and prioritized by Members as part of the IHTSDO annual work plan. The post of Vice-Chair of the IHTSDO0IPaLM SIG is for two years, after which the Vice-Chair will become Chair of the SIG for a further two-year period. Thus the overall term of office is four years. This approach is to ensure succession planning. While serving in this role, the elected Vice-Chair is expected to attend IPaLM SIG meetings and assist the Chair in all aspects of the SIG’s work, in liaison with the IHTSDO. Activity is undertaken through regular phone conferences and the annual IHTSDO Business Meeting in October, if a face-to-face meeting is required. The Vice-Chair should also be willing to assume the responsibilities of Chair if the Chair is not available. Nominations, using the form attached, should be sent to Fleur McBriar at fmc@ihtsdo.org by Friday 12th July 2015 (by 23:00 UTC). (Note: Please do NOT reply directly to this email). If there are a number of candidates, a process of election will take place and decisions reviewed by the Healthcare Professional Coordination Group before sign-off by the IHTSDO Management Board. The successful candidate is expected to start immediately upon sign-off. Official policy information about the Appointment of Leadership of IHTSDO’s Working Groups is attached. The IHTSDO Conflict of Interest Policy (referred to in the nomination form) can be viewed at: http://tinyurl.com/IHTSDOConfOfInterest | fgilbert | Fri Jun 19 09:16:14 Z 2015 | post11303 | topc7534 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: LOINC - SNOMED CT Cooperation Project Technology Preview is available (collabnet topic id: topc7269)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: LOINC - SNOMED CT Cooperation Project Technology Preview is available | Dear IPaLM SIG Members, We are pleased to announce that the Technology Preview release of the LOINC - SNOMED Cooperation Project has been posted for review. You can download the files from CollabNet at https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/frs/do/viewRelease/projects.snomed_ct_international_releases/frs.technology_preview_packages.loinc_snomed_ct_cooperative_proj. The official announcement is below. We welcome your feedback on this release. Cheers, Suzanne --------- The Technology Previews of the LOINC - SNOMED CT Cooperation Project (The LOINC Term to SNOMED Expression Reference Set and the LOINC Part to SNOMED Map Reference Set Technology Previews) are now available. These Technology Preview reference sets represent a proof of concept and are distributed for evaluation purposes only. They are not for use in production clinical systems or in clinical settings. This Technology Preview should be evaluated in the context of the July 2014 SNOMED CT International Edition and June 2014 LOINC release. All files for the LOINC Term to SNOMED Expression Reference Set and the LOINC Part to SNOMED Map Reference Set Technology Previews are available from the “Technology Preview Packages” area in the “SNOMED CT International Releases” project on the IHTSDO Workspace. They are distributed in a single zipped archive file: • SnomedCT_LOINCTechnologyPreview_INT_20140926.zip If you have any questions about the the LOINC-SNOMED Expressions Refset and LOINC Part-SNOMED Map Technology Previews, or have difficulties downloading the files, please contact the IHTSDO at LOINC-SNOMEDProject@ihtsdo.org. | ssantamaria | Tue Oct 28 22:31:43 Z 2014 | post10744 | topc7269 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: LOINC - SNOMED CT Cooperation Project Technology Preview is available | Feedback on the Technology Preview is requested by 15 December. Instructions for providing feedback are included in the Documentation file. Suzanne | ssantamaria | Wed Oct 29 09:05:21 Z 2014 | post10750 | topc7269 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Next IPaLM SIG meeting (collabnet topic id: topc7218)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Next IPaLM SIG meeting | Dear Members of the IPaLM SIG, Jane Millar has requested that we set these meetings at fixed times, and she has stated that the usual time for SIG meetings is 1900 UTC which will allow for US, Australian and European countries to participate. As such, I would like to set the meeting for 1900 UTC on Tuesday October 21, 2014. If there are strong objections to this date and time, please let me know as soon as possible. We will be discussing a strategy to handle "other" LOINC terms, handling sample vs. non-sample observables and introduction of our new vice chair, Dr. Archie Prentice. Thanks, Alexis Carter, MD Chair, IHTSDO IPaLM SIG | acarter | Fri Oct 03 14:01:59 Z 2014 | post10664 | topc7218 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: LOINC - SNOMED CT Cooperation Project Technology Preview - phase 2 is available (collabnet topic id: topc7628)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: LOINC - SNOMED CT Cooperation Project Technology Preview - phase 2 is available | Dear IPaLM SIG Members, We recently published a second release of the Technology Preview of the LOINC - SNOMED CT Cooperative Project. This includes both the LOINC Term to SNOMED CT Expression reference set and the LOINC Part to SNOMED CT Map reference set. The release is distributed in a set of zipped files (in RF2, OWL and human readable formats). All files are available from the folder “LOINC - SNOMED CT Cooperative Project Technology Preview – phase 2”, to be found in the “Technology Preview Packages” area in the “SNOMED CT International Releases” project on the IHTSDO Workspace (https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/rel2510). USE WITHIN CLINICAL SYSTEMS CANNOT BE SUPPORTED AT THIS TIME. The Technology Preview reference sets represent a proof of concept and are distributed for evaluation purposes only. They are not for use in production clinical systems or in clinical settings. We welcome your review and feedback. Please provide feedback by 16 November, 2015 via the online feedback form: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1L_a_VsXMWgdPve-1cc9k5Jlfn-ZpWbOQUJYOAA0Fhnk/viewform?usp=send_form. If you have any questions about the Technology Preview, or have difficulties downloading the files, please contact IHTSDO at LOINC-SNOMEDProject@ihtsdo.org. Best wishes, Suzanne | ssantamaria | Wed Sep 09 18:55:47 Z 2015 | post11470 | topc7628 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: LOINC - SNOMED CT Cooperation Project Technology Preview - phase 2 is available | Hello again, I apologize to anyone who tried to download the LOINC - SNOMED CT Cooperation Project Technology Preview files after my original post and were unable to. We had a glitch with the previous link I sent, but it should work now for you all. Please visit this site to download the files: https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/frs/do/viewRelease/projects. snomed_ct_international_releases/frs.technology_preview_packages.loinc_snomed_ct_cooperative_pr_0. If you have any issues with this link, kindly let me know. Note that access with this link requires being a user on CollabNet, which shouldn't be a problem for anyone already in the IPaLM SIG. However if you pass this link on to someone who is not a CollabNet user they will need to register for an account before they can access the files. Cheers, Suzanne | ssantamaria | Tue Sep 22 17:48:06 Z 2015 | post11485 | topc7628 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IPaLM SIG agenda for today (collabnet topic id: topc7357)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IPaLM SIG agenda for today | Apologies for the late notice, but there should be no surprises on this agenda. See attached. I will also post to the folder. | acarter | Tue Jan 20 18:55:36 Z 2015 | post10910 | topc7357 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IHTSDO IPaLM SIG vice chair (collabnet topic id: topc7213)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IHTSDO IPaLM SIG vice chair | The IHTSDO is pleased to announce that the IHTSDO Management Board has unanimously accepted the recommendation of the Healthcare Professions Coordination Group that Archibald Prentice be appointed vice-chair of the IHTSDO IPaLM SIG. Archie will work with Alexis Carter to further shape the advisory role of the IPaLM SIG and subsequently take over the role of Chair Our thanks to Archie for taking on this role Jane Millar Head of Collaboration IHTSDO | jmillar | Thu Oct 02 20:04:29 Z 2014 | post10651 | topc7213 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Call for Nominations: Vice-Chair of the IHTSDO IPaLM SIG (collabnet topic id: topc6937)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Call for Nominations: Vice-Chair of the IHTSDO IPaLM SIG | Nominations are invited at this time for the post of Vice-Chair of the IHTSDO International Pathology & Laboratory Medicine (IPaLM) Special Interest Group (SIG). The SIG was established to provide advice on new, as well as updated, pathology content in SNOMED CT, through projects agreed by the IHTSDO Content Committee and prioritized by Members as part of the IHTSDO annual work plan. The post of Vice-Chair of the IPaLM SIG will likely be for one year (subject to the contribution of the current chair), after which the Vice-Chair will become Chair of the SIG for a two-year period. Thus the overall term of office is three years. Such an approach is to ensure succession planning. While serving in this role, the elected Vice-Chair is expected to attend IPaLM SIG meetings and assist the Chair in all aspects of the SIGs work, in liaison with the IHTSDO. Work will be undertaken through regular phone conferences and the IHTSDO Business Meeting in October each year, if a face-to-face meeting is required. The Vice-Chair should also be willing to assume the responsibilities of the Chair when the Chair is unavailable. Nominations, using the form attached, should be sent to Fleur McBriar at fmc@ihtsdo.org by Monday, 04th August, 2014 (23:00 UTC). If there are a number of candidates, a process of election will take place and decisions signed off by the Healthcare Professional Coordination Group. The successful candidate is expected to start immediately. The IHTSDO Conflict of Interest Policy (referred to in the nomination form) can be viewed at: http://www.ihtsdo.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Docs_01/About_IHTSDO/Publications/Policies_and_Regulations/IHTSDO_Conflict_of_Interest_and_Code_of_Ethics_Policy_version_1_02_20140619.pdf | fgilbert | Mon Jul 21 15:20:07 Z 2014 | post10309 | topc6937 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: GoToMeeting details for call 16 December at 2000 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc7327)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: GoToMeeting details for call 16 December at 2000 UTC | Tue, Dec 16, 20.00 UTC Please join my meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone. https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/296799253 Telephone numbers: Norway +47 21 03 58 95 - Switzerland +41 (0) 435 0006 96 - France +33 (0) 170 950 593 - Australia +61 2 8355 1023 - Canada +1 (647) 497-9391 - Finland +358 (0) 942 41 5777 - Denmark +45 (0) 69 91 88 61 - New Zealand +64 (0) 9 442 7358 - Spain +34 931 81 6668 - Italy +39 0 699 26 68 58 - Belgium +32 (0) 38 08 1855 - Germany +49 (0) 692 5736 7211 - Netherlands +31 (0) 708 912 514 - Sweden +46 (0) 852 503 498 - Austria +43 (0) 7 2088 0034 - United States +1 (773) 945-1031 - United Kingdom +44 (0) 330 221 0085 - Ireland +353 (0) 15 290 180 | jmillar | Tue Dec 16 15:54:59 Z 2014 | post10858 | topc7327 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: GoToMeeting details for call 16 December at 2000 UTC | Reminder of our meeting today. Here are the gotomeeting details: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: GoToMeeting details for call 16 December at 2000 UTC Tue, Dec 16, 20.00 UTC Please join my meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone. https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/296799253 Telephone numbers: Norway +47 21 03 58 95 - Switzerland +41 (0) 435 0006 96 - France +33 (0) 170 950 593 - Australia +61 2 8355 1023 - Canada +1 (647) 497-9391 - Finland +358 (0) 942 41 5777 - Denmark +45 (0) 69 91 88 61 - New Zealand +64 (0) 9 442 7358 - Spain +34 931 81 6668 - Italy +39 0 699 26 68 58 - Belgium +32 (0) 38 08 1855 - Germany +49 (0) 692 5736 7211 - Netherlands +31 (0) 708 912 514 - Sweden +46 (0) 852 503 498 - Austria +43 (0) 7 2088 0034 - United States +1 (773) 945-1031 - United Kingdom +44 (0) 330 221 0085 - Ireland +353 (0) 15 290 180 | acarter | Tue Dec 16 16:11:42 Z 2014 | post10859 | topc7327 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IHTSDO IPaLM SIG meeting July 2014 (collabnet topic id: topc6871)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IHTSDO IPaLM SIG meeting July 2014 | Hi everyone, We are inviting all members and observers of the IPaLM SIG to respond to the doodle website below which will help us know which times will be good for a conference call for the SIG. A high level version of the agenda is below. Please answer the doodle by the end of this week so that I can get a meeting scheduled early next week. Please access this website to indicate your availability (time-zone support enabled): http://doodle.com/hse462fmem883sf6. High-level agenda: - Introduction of Farzaneh Ashrafi and Suzanne Santamaria, the IHTSDO editors who are the liaisons assigned to the IPaLM SIG - Presentation on LOINC related activity by Farzaneh and Suzanne to enable discussion on the points at which the SIG may advise - Identify other areas where SIG may have valuable input - Preparation of the outline of work for the next 12 months to be submitted to IHTSDO leadership as an official work plan - Seek feedback on a solution IHTSDO is proposing for representation of Micro biology ‘species’ types in SNOMED CT eg Klebsiella species - Nomination process for a vice-chair for the SIG Sincerely, Alexis B. Carter, MD Chair, IPaLM SIG | acarter | Wed Jun 25 01:05:07 Z 2014 | post10217 | topc6871 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IHTSDO IPaLM SIG meeting July 2014 | Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IHTSDO IPaLM SIG meeting July 2014 Hi everyone, This is a reminder that we are inviting all members and observers of the IPaLM SIG to respond to the doodle website below which will help us know which times will be good for a conference call for the SIG. <b>A SLIGHT CHANGE...we need answers to the doodle below by Friday, June 27, at UTC 14:00 (10:00 AM US Eastern Time; 3:00 pm London Time)</b>. Jane Millar needs some time to get the Conference call information together before going on holiday next week. As a reminder, a high level version of the agenda is below. Please access this website to indicate your availability (time-zone support enabled): http://doodle.com/hse462fmem883sf6. High-level agenda: - Introduction of Farzaneh Ashrafi and Suzanne Santamaria, the IHTSDO editors who are the liaisons assigned to the IPaLM SIG - Presentation on LOINC related activity by Farzaneh and Suzanne to enable discussion on the points at which the SIG may advise - Identify other areas where SIG may have valuable input - Preparation of the outline of work for the next 12 months to be submitted to IHTSDO leadership as an official work plan - Seek feedback on a solution IHTSDO is proposing for representation of Micro biology ‘species’ types in SNOMED CT eg Klebsiella species - Nomination process for a vice-chair for the SIG Sincerely, Alexis B. Carter, MD Chair, IPaLM SIG | acarter | Thu Jun 26 23:19:53 Z 2014 | post10238 | topc6871 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IHTSDO IPaLM SIG meeting July 2014 | Our next meeting will be scheduled for Monday, July 21 according to the times posted below based on your time zone (Corresponding UTC (GMT) Monday, July 21, 2014 at 13:00:00): Atlanta (U.S.A. - Georgia) Monday, July 21, 2014 at 9:00:00 AM EDT UTC-4 hours London (United Kingdom - England) Monday, July 21, 2014 at 2:00:00 PM BST UTC+1 hour Stockholm (Sweden) Monday, July 21, 2014 at 3:00:00 PM CEST UTC+2 hours Sydney (Australia - New South Wales) Monday, July 21, 2014 at 11:00:00 PM AEST UTC+10 hours Chicago (U.S.A. - Illinois) Monday, July 21, 2014 at 8:00:00 AM CDT UTC-5 hours Paris (France) Monday, July 21, 2014 at 3:00:00 PM CEST UTC+2 hours Copenhagen (Denmark) Monday, July 21, 2014 at 3:00:00 PM CEST UTC+2 hours I realize that this time is not ideal for our Australian members, but I had to choose a time that would work for the most people including our two IHTSDO content editor liaisons and Jane Millar who oversees this group. I am looking forward to speaking with all of you. Conference call information will be forthcoming. Sincerely, Alexis Carter, MD Chair, IPaLM SIG, IHTSDO | acarter | Fri Jun 27 14:17:44 Z 2014 | post10241 | topc6871 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IPaLM meeting on Monday (collabnet topic id: topc3817)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IPaLM meeting on Monday | The International Pathology and Laboratory Medicine (IPaLM) SIG will be meeting in Sydney on Monday afternoon. Our agenda is attached. We will have a conference call-in number then. We welcome your participation and look forward to seeing you then. | markennedy | Thu Oct 06 14:57:30 Z 2011 | post5440 | topc3817 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IPaLM meeting on Monday | The GotoMeeting invitation information for the IPaLM SIG meeting is below: Time of meeting: - Sydney, Australia: Monday October 10th from 1 pm to 5:30 pm - Vilnius, Lithuania: Monday October 10th from 5:00 am to 9:30 am - USA, Eastern Standard Time: from Sunday October 9th at 10 pm to Monday October 10th at 2:30 am - USA, Central Time: from Sunday October 9th at 9 pm to Monday October 10th at 1:30 am 1. Please join my meeting. https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/232638057 2. You will be connected to audio using your computer's microphone and speakers (VoIP). A headset is recommended. Meeting Password: ipalm Meeting ID: 232-638-057 | acarter | Sun Oct 09 23:03:00 Z 2011 | post5498 | topc3817 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IPaLM meeting on Monday | Here are the phone conference line numbers for the IPaLM SIG meeting: Monday October 10th, 13.00 AM – 17.30 PM at local Sydney time (Monday October 10th, 02:00 UTC to 06.30 UTC) Line # 3 Passcode: 54362# Instructions: 1. Use a dial-in number (list below) to dial the IHTSDO Conference System. 2. Choose telephone conference line by pressing 3 3. Enter the pass code 54362# AUSTRALIA BRISBANE +61 731234424 CANADA TORONTO +1 4168000350 CYPRUS NICOSIA +35722030509 DENMARK COPENHAGEN +45 43396372 ESTONIA TALLINN +372 6680309 LITHUANIA VILNIUS +370 52058946 NETHERLANDS AMSTERDAM +31 202629995 NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND +64 99250305 SINGAPORE SINGAPORE +65 31581162 SPAIN MADRID +34911875628 SWEDEN STOCKHOLM +46 852507971 SLOVENIA LJUBLJANA +38616002717 SLOVAK REPUBLIC BRATISLAVA +421233006932 UNITED KINGDOM BIRMINGHAM +44 1213142062 UNITED STATES CHICAGO +1 3124966622 UNITED STATES LOS ANGELES +1 2133253224 UNITED STATES WASHINGTON +1 2022924256 Please be advised that your GoToMeeting details will be issued Saturday October 8th - please share all dial in details information with the IPalM members. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. | acarter | Sun Oct 09 23:10:25 Z 2011 | post5499 | topc3817 |
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IPaLM meeting on April 10th at 4 pm Central (USA) | Dear all, Below are the details for the conference call/web meeting on April 10th at 4 pm Central/USA. 1. Please join my meeting. https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/840220320 2. Use your microphone and speakers (VoIP) - a headset is recommended. Or, call in using your telephone. Australia: +61 (0) 2 9037 1944 Belgium: +32 (0) 28 08 9321 Denmark: +45 (0) 69 91 80 05 France: +33 (0) 182 880 780 Netherlands: +31 (0) 208 908 267 United Kingdom: +44 (0) 203 535 0611 United States: +1 (773) 945-1031 Access Code: 840-220-320 Audio PIN: Shown after joining the meeting Meeting ID: 840-220-320 Please don’t hesitate to contact me if you have any issues or problems connecting to the call. Thank you, Mary Kennedy | markennedy | Fri Mar 30 20:14:14 Z 2012 | post6446 | topc3817 |
| Agenda for IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IPaLM meeting on April 10th at 4 pm Central (USA) | Attached is the Agenda for the April 10th call. | markennedy | Thu Apr 05 15:00:28 Z 2012 | post6474 | topc3817 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Reminder: Call for Nominations for IPaLM SIG Vice-Chair (collabnet topic id: topc7547)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Reminder: Call for Nominations for IPaLM SIG Vice-Chair | Nominations are invited at this time for the post of Vice-Chair of the IHTSDO International Pathology & Laboratory Medicine (IPaLM) Special Interest Group (SIG). The SIG was established to provide advice on new, as well as updated, pathology content in SNOMED CT, through projects agreed by the IHTSDO Content Committee and prioritized by Members as part of the IHTSDO annual work plan. The post of Vice-Chair of the IHTSDO0IPaLM SIG is for two years, after which the Vice-Chair will become Chair of the SIG for a further two-year period. Thus the overall term of office is four years. This approach is to ensure succession planning. While serving in this role, the elected Vice-Chair is expected to attend IPaLM SIG meetings and assist the Chair in all aspects of the SIG’s work, in liaison with the IHTSDO. Activity is undertaken through regular phone conferences and the annual IHTSDO Business Meeting in October, if a face-to-face meeting is required. The Vice-Chair should also be willing to assume the responsibilities of Chair if the Chair is not available. Nominations, using the form attached, should be sent to Fleur McBriar at fmc@ihtsdo.org by this Friday 10th July 2015. (Note: Please do NOT reply directly to this email). If there are a number of candidates, a process of election will take place and decisions reviewed by the Healthcare Professional Coordination Group before sign-off by the IHTSDO Management Board. The successful candidate is expected to start immediately upon sign-off. Official policy information about the Appointment of Leadership of IHTSDO’s Working Groups is attached. The IHTSDO Conflict of Interest Policy (referred to in the nomination form) can be viewed at: http://tinyurl.com/IHTSDOConfOfInterest | fgilbert | Mon Jul 06 10:46:56 Z 2015 | post11325 | topc7547 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Invitation to the EU COST EuroTelepath meeting in Paris, Juine 20-21, 2011 (collabnet topic id: topc3063)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Invitation to the EU COST EuroTelepath meeting in Paris, Juine 20-21, 2011 | Dear Friends, Please be informed and invited to the upcoming EU COST EuroTelepath meeting in Paris. The meeting is open and the host – Christel Daniel would appreciate notice of your coming and suggestions for the agenda (please see Christel’s message and use the doodle below). Arvydas ***** I'm pleased to send you the draft agenda of the WG1&2 meeting in Paris on Monday 20th & Tuesday (morning) 21st June. Don't hesitate to suggest to add any item to the agenda Could you please, for organization issues, fill the following doodle http://www.doodle.com/h5vku6nhnwsx5a5a Best regards Christel | alaurinavicius | Thu Jun 02 02:31:01 Z 2011 | post4372 | topc3063 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Invitation to the EU COST EuroTelepath meeting in Paris, Juine 20-21, 2011 | And here are the directions attached. | alaurinavicius | Thu Jun 02 02:34:07 Z 2011 | post4373 | topc3063 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IPaLM Meeting 20150421 - Materials for discussion (collabnet topic id: topc7469)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IPaLM Meeting 20150421 - Materials for discussion | Please find attached, materials to be reviewed by Dr. Jim Campbell during our meeting | wscampbell | Sun Apr 19 21:31:34 Z 2015 | post11150 | topc7469 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: August 2012 Meeting (collabnet topic id: topc4930)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: August 2012 Meeting | Based on our poll results, the next conference call for IPaLM will be Thursday, August 30th at 8pm Central (see time zone listings below). An agenda will be posted closer to the date. The Go To Meeting link is below and on the wiki page. Los Angeles-August 30 at 6 am Salt Lake City-August 30 at 7 am Chicago-August 30 at 8 am New York-August 30 at 9 am London-August 30 at 2 pm Copenhagen-August 30 at 3 pm Sydney-August 30 at 11 pm 1. Please join my meeting. https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/840220320 2. Use your microphone and speakers (VoIP) - a headset is recommended. Or, call in using your telephone. Australia: +61 2 9037 1944 Belgium: +32 (0) 28 08 9321 Denmark: +45 (0) 69 91 80 05 France: +33 (0) 182 880 780 Netherlands: +31 (0) 208 908 267 United Kingdom: +44 (0) 203 535 0611 United States: +1 (773) 945-1031 Access Code: 840-220-320 Audio PIN: Shown after joining the meeting Meeting ID: 840-220-320 Thanks! | markennedy | Wed Aug 22 16:27:54 Z 2012 | post7184 | topc4930 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: August 2012 Meeting | PLEASE NOTE THE CALL IS AT 8 AM CENTRAL. All other times are correct. Sorry for any confusion. Based on our poll results, the next conference call for IPaLM will be Thursday, August 30th at 8am Central (see time zone listings below). An agenda will be posted closer to the date. The Go To Meeting link is on the wiki page. Los Angeles-August 30 at 6 am Salt Lake City-August 30 at 7 am Chicago-August 30 at 8 am New York-August 30 at 9 am London-August 30 at 2 pm Copenhagen-August 30 at 3 pm Sydney-August 30 at 11 pm Thanks! | markennedy | Thu Aug 23 15:37:21 Z 2012 | post7188 | topc4930 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: June 28th Conference Call (collabnet topic id: topc4734)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: June 28th Conference Call | Below are the details for the conference call/web meeting on June 28th at 4 pm Central/USA. 1. Please join my meeting. https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/693798680 2. Use your microphone and speakers (VoIP) - a headset is recommended. Or, call in using your telephone. Australia: +61 2 9037 1944 Denmark: +45 (0) 69 91 80 05 Finland: +358 (0) 931 58 1746 United Kingdom: +44 (0) 207 151 1850 United States: +1 (773) 945-1031 Access Code: 693-798-680 Audio PIN: Shown after joining the meeting Meeting ID: 693-798-680 Please don’t hesitate to contact me if you have any issues or problems connecting to the call. Thank you, Mary Kennedy | markennedy | Wed Jun 20 18:57:19 Z 2012 | post6883 | topc4734 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Next Conference call for IPaLM SIG (collabnet topic id: topc7164)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Next Conference call for IPaLM SIG | The Doodle results are in. The next conference call for the IHTSDO IPaLM SIG will be: Corresponding UTC (GMT) Tuesday, September 23, 2014 at 20:00 (8 PM) to 21:00 (9 PM) Atlanta (U.S.A. - Georgia) Tuesday, September 23, 2014 at 4:00 PM - 5:00 PM EDT UTC-4 hours Sydney (Australia - New South Wales) Wednesday, September 24, 2014 at 6:00 AM - 7:00 AM AEST UTC+10 hours Chicago (U.S.A. - Illinois) Tuesday, September 23, 2014 at 3:00 PM - 4:00 PM CDT UTC-5 hours London (United Kingdom - England) Tuesday, September 23, 2014 at 9:00 PM - 10:00 PM BST UTC+1 hour Los Angeles (U.S.A. - California) Tuesday, September 23, 2014 at 1:00 PM - 2:00 PM PDT UTC-7 hours A gotomeeting invitation and agenda will be sent later today. Thanks, Alexis Carter, MD Chair, IPaLM SIG | acarter | Tue Sep 16 12:48:58 Z 2014 | post10580 | topc7164 |
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Gotomeeting information Next Conference call for IPaLM SIG | IPaLM SIG • 1. Please join my meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone on Tue, Sep 23, 9:00 PM BST o https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/262301181 • 2. Use your microphone and speakers (VOIP) for audio. You'll sound best with a headset. You can also call in using your telephone. o Belgium (Long distance): +32 (0) 28 08 9321 o New Zealand (Long distance): +64 (0) 9 909 7882 o Netherlands (Long distance): +31 (0) 208 908 267 o Sweden (Long distance): +46 (0) 852 503 498 o United States (Long distance): +1 (773) 945-1031 o United Kingdom (Long distance): +44 (0) 20 3535 0611 o Canada (Long distance): +1 (647) 497-9391 o Australia (Long distance): +61 2 9087 3604 o Spain (Long distance): +34 911 23 0850 o Denmark (Long distance): +45 (0) 69 91 88 61 Access Code: 262-301-181 Audio PIN: Shown after joining the session • Not at your computer? Click the link to join this meeting from your iPhone®, iPad®, Android® or Windows Phone® device via the GoToMeeting app. • GoToMeeting® | acarter | Tue Sep 23 13:36:40 Z 2014 | post10599 | topc7164 |
General__Discussions
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Issue of precoordination of test names and reality (collabnet topic id: topc2770)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Issue of precoordination of test names and reality | It's been an ongoing problem here how to wrestle the different specificity between SCT representation of concepts - Real world concepts - and Real world terms. Particularly, clinical practice tends to use terms where the target specimen type is not used for the 'default' or common test, and only specified if this isn't the case. For example "Glucose" is actually "serum glucose measurement" (or maybe more accurately serum/plasma..) "Urine glucose" is actually "Urine glucose measurement" So, when mapping from a local term to SCT I've been running into problems as it appears that concepts have generally been created to reflect what people 'say' rather than what people 'mean'. Although I can determine the implied detail from source data, the same rules obviously can't be applied in SCT. For example, I might state/assume all antibody tests in my source data are performed on serum unless stated otherwise. So I run into problems in the absence of the required precoordinated concepts. A quick scan against the description in the July 10 release shows about 2200 antibody test procedures. Of these: 82 'contain' "blood" 74 'contain' "serum" (some of which I know aren't actually 'serum specimens') 33 'contain' "plasma" So there is a distinct gap here... Similar issues arise with qualititative/quantitative procedures, and more I'm sure. So I'm interested in: A) What are other's experiences in this space, and how have you managed it. B) Are there plans on the horizon to resolve this in SCT? I'm looking down the path of a bulk submission, after I investigate the likely acceptance of.. | mcordell | Mon Jan 24 05:36:55 Z 2011 | post3638 | topc2770 |
| RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Issue of precoordination of test names and reality | This is a common issue and runs along with the common practices in labs to conflate things like "blood" and "serum", since what a laboratory receives is usually a clotted blood sample, otherwise entered in the system as "blood" and what is actually used in the performance of the test. From a more rigorous chain of custody point of view in a lab, it would really be nice if we differentiated what is received as a specimen for testing and what is actually used in an analysis, However, most laboratory systems don't have that concept built it and there is only one way to record the specimen type. While that does not address your problem directly, I would suggest that you submit a project to review this issue as it will most likely have a sizeable impact on content. There needs to be a policy regarding the point that is used when assigning a specimen type to an observable (i.e. that of the receiving personnel or that of the bench analyst). I would vote for the latter, but there is the problem that the first recording of the specimen is usually at the receiving function and this colors the view of any future assignments. Jim James T. Case MS, DVM, PhD Health Program Specialist, SNOMED CT National Library of Medicine/NIH Office: 301-594-9152 Cell: 301-412-9287 james.case@mail.nih.gov -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Cordell (ihtsdo AU) [mailto:matthew.cordell@nehta.gov.au] Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 12:37 AM To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo Subject: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Issue of precoordination of test names and reality It's been an ongoing problem here how to wrestle the different specificity between SCT representation of concepts - Real world concepts - and Real world terms. Particularly, clinical practice tends to use terms where the target specimen type is not used for the 'default' or common test, and only specified if this isn't the case. For example "Glucose" is actually "serum glucose measurement" (or maybe more accurately serum/plasma..) "Urine glucose" is actually "Urine glucose measurement" So, when mapping from a local term to SCT I've been running into problems as it appears that concepts have generally been created to reflect what people 'say' rather than what people 'mean'. Although I can determine the implied detail from source data, the same rules obviously can't be applied in SCT. For example, I might state/assume all antibody tests in my source data are performed on serum unless stated otherwise. So I run into problems in the absence of the required precoordinated concepts. A quick scan against the description in the July 10 release shows about 2200 antibody test procedures. Of these: 82 'contain' "blood" 74 'contain' "serum" (some of which I know aren't actually 'serum specimens') 33 'contain' "plasma" So there is a distinct gap here... Similar issues arise with qualititative/quantitative procedures, and more I'm sure. So I'm interested in: A) What are other's experiences in this space, and how have you managed it. B) Are there plans on the horizon to resolve this in SCT? I'm looking down the path of a bulk submission, after I investigate the likely acceptance of.. _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post3638 | jcase | Tue Jan 25 13:34:00 Z 2011 | post3640 | topc2770 |
| RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Issue of precoordination of test names and reality | Would you be able to specify an example, including the SNOMED CT concept or description IDs so that I can examine the problem within the SCT hierarchy? I usually derive the meaning of a concept from its placement in the hierarchy as much by its textual description. It is very possible that based on the intent specified in the description, the concepts have been misclassified, but let me look more closely at your example first... Thanks, Raj Dash, MD IPALM SIG Chair Duke University Health System Durham, NC 27710 USA -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Cordell (ihtsdo AU) [mailto:matthew.cordell@nehta.gov.au] Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 12:37 AM To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo Subject: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Issue of precoordination of test names and reality It's been an ongoing problem here how to wrestle the different specificity between SCT representation of concepts - Real world concepts - and Real world terms. Particularly, clinical practice tends to use terms where the target specimen type is not used for the 'default' or common test, and only specified if this isn't the case. For example "Glucose" is actually "serum glucose measurement" (or maybe more accurately serum/plasma..) "Urine glucose" is actually "Urine glucose measurement" So, when mapping from a local term to SCT I've been running into problems as it appears that concepts have generally been created to reflect what people 'say' rather than what people 'mean'. Although I can determine the implied detail from source data, the same rules obviously can't be applied in SCT. For example, I might state/assume all antibody tests in my source data are performed on serum unless stated otherwise. So I run into problems in the absence of the required precoordinated concepts. A quick scan against the description in the July 10 release shows about 2200 antibody test procedures. Of these: 82 'contain' "blood" 74 'contain' "serum" (some of which I know aren't actually 'serum specimens') 33 'contain' "plasma" So there is a distinct gap here... Similar issues arise with qualititative/quantitative procedures, and more I'm sure. So I'm interested in: A) What are other's experiences in this space, and how have you managed it. B) Are there plans on the horizon to resolve this in SCT? I'm looking down the path of a bulk submission, after I investigate the likely acceptance of.. _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post3638 | rdash | Tue Jan 25 14:15:55 Z 2011 | post3641 | topc2770 |
| Re: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Issue of precoordination of test names and reality | Thanks Jim, I agree, for observables it probably needs to be the specimen type that gets put into the analyser. The lab might receive an EDTA (whole) blood - but may analyse Whole blood, plasma or red cells. Which looks to be consistent with the new observable model. For most situations the specimen tested is the same thing the observable "inhere's" in, or at least some sort of supertype. I expect we'll be going with LOINC for observables at the moment, and this generally has sufficient precoordination. But there's still a need for "requesting procedures". Although the new(and old) model covered this, I'm not sure how much precoordinated to expect when that model is implemented though. The problem of recording/tracking the specimen actually collected is up the LIS's (I reckon)... Matt. | mcordell | Tue Feb 01 06:54:50 Z 2011 | post3658 | topc2770 |
| Re: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Issue of precoordination of test names and reality | Thanks Raj, I don't think there's a problem with how the concepts have classified, but maybe more a historical artefact in that the (human used)terms upon which concepts have been modelled (or at least inspired by) traditionally aren't 'fully specified' and have a lot of implied meaning. For example, (some quick quering on the Jan 11 release) The vast majority of measurement procedures performed would actually be quantitative, however only 147 -out of almost 7000- are modeled as such. (Note: there's only 198 instances of using the SCALE TYPE attribute). I think the pragmatic approach here though might be to just assume quantitative unless otherwise said... for most cases. Works like "Screen" may imply a qualitative measurement. eg. Drug Screen. Such language implications are likely to be context/regional dependent though... My real dilemma is the absence of concepts that don't explicitly state (either in the FSN of modelling) the target specimen. Examples: Almost anything below 3527003 | antibody measurement 134262009 | hepatitis C antibody level 118053002 | HIV 1 p32 antibody assay I'd expect the majority of antibody testing is performed on serum, though there are exceptions so this isn't a suitable inference.. Rabies virus antibodies on Serum or CSF... (Maybe not the greatest example, but it's in the manual) The difficulty comes when trying to correlate SCT concepts to real world usage... Again, perhaps the observable project may result in an influx of more relevant concepts?? Matt. | mcordell | Tue Feb 01 06:57:23 Z 2011 | post3659 | topc2770 |
| RE: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Issue of precoordination of test names and reality | Matt, Can you give me a little more info on "requesting procedures"? Are you talking about orderables, i.e. the notion that what you ask for may result in one or more observables that are not the same as the order (e.g. a CBC results in multiple observables, none of which have the moniker CBC)? Jim James T. Case MS, DVM, PhD Health Program Specialist, SNOMED CT National Library of Medicine/NIH Office: 301-594-9152 Cell: 301-412-9287 james.case@mail.nih.gov -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Cordell (ihtsdo AU) [mailto:matthew.cordell@nehta.gov.au] Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 10:55 PM To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo Subject: Re: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Issue of precoordination of test names and reality Thanks Jim, I agree, for observables it probably needs to be the specimen type that gets put into the analyser. The lab might receive an EDTA (whole) blood - but may analyse Whole blood, plasma or red cells. Which looks to be consistent with the new observable model. For most situations the specimen tested is the same thing the observable "inhere's" in, or at least some sort of supertype. I expect we'll be going with LOINC for observables at the moment, and this generally has sufficient precoordination. But there's still a need for "requesting procedures". Although the new(and old) model covered this, I'm not sure how much precoordinated to expect when that model is implemented though. The problem of recording/tracking the specimen actually collected is up the LIS's (I reckon)... Matt. _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post3658 | jcase | Tue Feb 01 14:12:04 Z 2011 | post3663 | topc2770 |
| RE: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Issue of precoordination of test names and reality | Matt, I didn't mention it in my last response, but this is where I think you are better served by using LOINC in this space. The issues you raise regarding the completeness of the modeling for observables is addressed fairly well in LOINC, including the specimen specificity. One must consider the particular context of use, however. For example, if you are using HL7 messaging to convey information, the specimen may be specified in another part of the message allowing you to use a more generic LOINC code (which simplifies mapping to local codes). I think describing the use case (if you have and I missed it, my apologies) will help sort out the most appropriate terminology to use. However, the issues with modeling completeness that you bring up still need to be addressed. Regards, Jim James T. Case MS, DVM, PhD Health Program Specialist, SNOMED CT National Library of Medicine/NIH Office: 301-594-9152 Cell: 301-412-9287 james.case@mail.nih.gov -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Cordell (ihtsdo AU) [mailto:matthew.cordell@nehta.gov.au] Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 10:57 PM To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo Subject: Re: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Issue of precoordination of test names and reality Thanks Raj, I don't think there's a problem with how the concepts have classified, but maybe more a historical artefact in that the (human used)terms upon which concepts have been modelled (or at least inspired by) traditionally aren't 'fully specified' and have a lot of implied meaning. For example, (some quick quering on the Jan 11 release) The vast majority of measurement procedures performed would actually be quantitative, however only 147 -out of almost 7000- are modeled as such. (Note: there's only 198 instances of using the SCALE TYPE attribute). I think the pragmatic approach here though might be to just assume quantitative unless otherwise said... for most cases. Works like "Screen" may imply a qualitative measurement. eg. Drug Screen. Such language implications are likely to be context/regional dependent though... My real dilemma is the absence of concepts that don't explicitly state (either in the FSN of modelling) the target specimen. Examples: Almost anything below 3527003 | antibody measurement 134262009 | hepatitis C antibody level 118053002 | HIV 1 p32 antibody assay I'd expect the majority of antibody testing is performed on serum, though there are exceptions so this isn't a suitable inference.. Rabies virus antibodies on Serum or CSF... (Maybe not the greatest example, but it's in the manual) The difficulty comes when trying to correlate SCT concepts to real world usage... Again, perhaps the observable project may result in an influx of more relevant concepts?? Matt. _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post3659 | jcase | Tue Feb 01 14:20:50 Z 2011 | post3664 | topc2770 |
| RE: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Issue of precoordination of test names and reality | Dear Everyone, I would like to remind all of the Observable and Investigation Model Project, the lab trial performed in 2009 and the new proposed concept model for observables. The issues mentioned in this conversation have been, are and/or should be discussed in this project. If you want more information, please join in on the telecons! Regards, Daniel, co-chair -- Daniel Karlsson, PhD Department of Biomedical Engineering/Medical Informatics Linköpings universitet SE-58185 Linköping Sweden Phone: +46 13 286762, Cellular: +46 70 8350109, Skype: imt_danka On Tue, 2011-02-01 at 15:20 +0100, James Case (ihtsdo US) wrote: > Matt, > > I didn't mention it in my last response, but this is where I think you are better served by using LOINC in this space. The issues you raise regarding the completeness of the modeling for observables is addressed fairly well in LOINC, including the specimen specificity. One must consider the particular context of use, however. For example, if you are using HL7 messaging to convey information, the specimen may be specified in another part of the message allowing you to use a more generic LOINC code (which simplifies mapping to local codes). > > I think describing the use case (if you have and I missed it, my apologies) will help sort out the most appropriate terminology to use. However, the issues with modeling completeness that you bring up still need to be addressed. > Regards, > Jim > > James T. Case MS, DVM, PhD > Health Program Specialist, SNOMED CT > National Library of Medicine/NIH > Office: 301-594-9152 > Cell: 301-412-9287 > james.case@mail.nih.gov > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Matthew Cordell (ihtsdo AU) [mailto:matthew.cordell@nehta.gov.au] > Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 10:57 PM > To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo > Subject: Re: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Issue of precoordination of test names and reality > > Thanks Raj, > > I don't think there's a problem with how the concepts have classified, but maybe more a historical artefact in that the (human used)terms upon which concepts have been modelled (or at least inspired by) traditionally aren't 'fully specified' and have a lot of implied meaning. > > For example, (some quick quering on the Jan 11 release) > The vast majority of measurement procedures performed would actually be quantitative, however only 147 -out of almost 7000- are modeled as such. (Note: there's only 198 instances of using the SCALE TYPE attribute). > I think the pragmatic approach here though might be to just assume quantitative unless otherwise said... for most cases. Works like "Screen" may imply a qualitative measurement. eg. Drug Screen. Such language implications are likely to be context/regional dependent though... > > My real dilemma is the absence of concepts that don't explicitly state (either in the FSN of modelling) the target specimen. > Examples: > Almost anything below 3527003 | antibody measurement > 134262009 | hepatitis C antibody level > 118053002 | HIV 1 p32 antibody assay > > I'd expect the majority of antibody testing is performed on serum, though there are exceptions so this isn't a suitable inference.. > Rabies virus antibodies on Serum or CSF... (Maybe not the greatest example, but it's in the manual) > > The difficulty comes when trying to correlate SCT concepts to real world usage... Again, perhaps the observable project may result in an influx of more relevant concepts?? > > Matt. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > General Discussions > https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post3659 > > > _______________________________________________ > General Discussions > https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post3664 > | dkarlsson | Tue Feb 01 15:11:22 Z 2011 | post3665 | topc2770 |
| RE: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Issue of precoordination of test names and reality | Thanks Daniel, I have been following the observables project, but am interested in how others have handled these problems in the interim. Also, are you able to indicate what we can expect at the end of that project, I'm still not quite sure. Will the 'required' LOINC codes be replicated within SNOMED, will there be some sort of a map/conversion or will it require post-coordination? (I considered asking in the obs forum :) ). Matt Cordell | mcordell | Wed Feb 02 00:44:06 Z 2011 | post3666 | topc2770 |
| RE: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Issue of precoordination of test names and reality | Jim, Thanks, yes I do mean orderables. It's been an effort ensuring we're all talking about the same thing for the pathology components (internal and external). Our use case is simply Pathology reporting/requesting, but it looks like we'll be confined to v2.x (likely 2.4, if not 2.3.1) for the moment. LOINC has always been the path of least resistance (practically and politically), but we've been trying to promote SNOMED CT. LOINC for reporting will make the reconciliation between what's requested and resulted a little easier, but it would be nice (if not naïve :)) to have a consistent terminology across most areas... Anyway, thanks again. I feel a better about going down the path of LOINC now. It's likely we'll be using the generic-method LOINC codes though, with method specifics elsewhere (at least when critical - when the difference between techniques is significant). Matt Cordell -----Original Message----- From: James Case (ihtsdo US) [mailto:james.case@mail.nih.gov] Sent: Wednesday, 2 February 2011 12:12 AM To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo Subject: RE: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Issue of precoordination of test names and reality Matt, Can you give me a little more info on "requesting procedures"? Are you talking about orderables, i.e. the notion that what you ask for may result in one or more observables that are not the same as the order (e.g. a CBC results in multiple observables, none of which have the moniker CBC)? Jim James T. Case MS, DVM, PhD Health Program Specialist, SNOMED CT National Library of Medicine/NIH Office: 301-594-9152 Cell: 301-412-9287 james.case@mail.nih.gov -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Cordell (ihtsdo AU) [mailto:matthew.cordell@nehta.gov.au] Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 10:55 PM To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo Subject: Re: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Issue of precoordination of test names and reality Thanks Jim, I agree, for observables it probably needs to be the specimen type that gets put into the analyser. The lab might receive an EDTA (whole) blood - but may analyse Whole blood, plasma or red cells. Which looks to be consistent with the new observable model. For most situations the specimen tested is the same thing the observable "inhere's" in, or at least some sort of supertype. I expect we'll be going with LOINC for observables at the moment, and this generally has sufficient precoordination. But there's still a need for "requesting procedures". Although the new(and old) model covered this, I'm not sure how much precoordinated to expect when that model is implemented though. The problem of recording/tracking the specimen actually collected is up the LIS's (I reckon)... Matt. _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post3658 _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post3663 | mcordell | Wed Feb 02 05:44:33 Z 2011 | post3667 | topc2770 |
| RE: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Issue of precoordination of test names and reality | An agreement between LOINC and SNOMED CT has been in the works for quite awhile now and I think is coming close to being finalized. When that happens, I think many of your questions will be answered. Jim James T. Case MS, DVM, PhD Health Program Specialist, SNOMED CT National Library of Medicine/NIH Office: 301-594-9152 Cell: 301-412-9287 james.case@mail.nih.gov -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Cordell (ihtsdo AU) [mailto:matthew.cordell@nehta.gov.au] Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 4:44 PM To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo Subject: RE: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Issue of precoordination of test names and reality Thanks Daniel, I have been following the observables project, but am interested in how others have handled these problems in the interim. Also, are you able to indicate what we can expect at the end of that project, I'm still not quite sure. Will the 'required' LOINC codes be replicated within SNOMED, will there be some sort of a map/conversion or will it require post-coordination? (I considered asking in the obs forum :) ). Matt Cordell _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post3666 | jcase | Wed Feb 02 16:26:10 Z 2011 | post3669 | topc2770 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Microbiology SIG discussion (collabnet topic id: topc7429)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Microbiology SIG discussion | As assigned, Scott Campbell and Jim Case discussed Microbiology encoding efforts led by Jim Case and Jeff Wilke. Efforts of Jim Case, et al are focused on managing the nature of Microbiology reporting/encoding of microbiology information within the electronic health record. There are currently issues with the various implementation methods in this domain that involve the blending of two SNOMED CT hierarchies (i.e., Organisms and Clinical findings) that are the subject of interest to this work effort. As such, we concurred that inventorying the methods for representing microbiology data and reports that IPaLM SIG members observe in their jurisdictions would provide valuable information to Jim Case, et al's efforts. We can add this to our agenda for our meeting of 21-April-15 | wscampbell | Thu Mar 19 19:35:33 Z 2015 | post11072 | topc7429 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IPaLM Histopathology Exemplars (collabnet topic id: topc7428)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IPaLM Histopathology Exemplars | As agreed on our call 17-March-2015, please upload example histopathology reports or histopathology data examples as currently employed in your unique community of practice. Examples will be reviewed and discussed during the call of 21-April-15 with the objective to identify common themes that are problematic among members as pertaining to histopathology reporting and SNOMED CT implementation/use. | wscampbell | Thu Mar 19 19:29:16 Z 2015 | post11071 | topc7428 |
| RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IPaLM Histopathology Exemplars | I'm sure that I'm just being paranoid, but just be sure NOT to upload any patient identifiers when uploading example histopathology reports. This would be considered a breach if it occurred from a US Laboratory which would have to be notified to the patient. Sincerely, Alexis This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender by reply e-mail message and destroy all copies of the original message (including attachments). -----Original Message----- From: Scott Campbell (IHTSDO US) [mailto:wcampbel@unmc.edu] Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2015 3:29 PM To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo Subject: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IPaLM Histopathology Exemplars As agreed on our call 17-March-2015, please upload example histopathology reports or histopathology data examples as currently employed in your unique community of practice. Examples will be reviewed and discussed during the call of 21-April-15 with the objective to identify common themes that are problematic among members as pertaining to histopathology reporting and SNOMED CT implementation/use. _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post11071 | acarter | Thu Mar 19 20:32:24 Z 2015 | post11073 | topc7428 |
| Re: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IPaLM Histopathology Exemplars | I wanted to reinforce Alexis point, though sure it was covered on the call by Scott. All data must be anonymised with no patient identification. Jane | jmillar | Thu Mar 19 20:38:27 Z 2015 | post11074 | topc7428 |
| Re: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IPaLM Histopathology Exemplars | Thanks Alexis and Jane! I did address this important point on the call, but I did not reiterate it in the discussion. So, thanks for your follow up. | wscampbell | Fri Mar 20 01:40:46 Z 2015 | post11075 | topc7428 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: IPaLM Histopathology Exemplars | Examples of pathology reports for pancreatic, whipple resections. The spreadsheet consists of 11 whipple resections that have been reviewed and abstracted. Abstractions include diagnostic statements contained within dictated sections of the report, as well as, discrete elements of the synoptic report for malignant cases. All data is void of any and all patient identifying information. | wscampbell | Wed Apr 15 14:50:53 Z 2015 | post11143 | topc7428 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: PLEASE READ - Starting IPaLM Meetings again; need key drivers (collabnet topic id: topc6834)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: PLEASE READ - Starting IPaLM Meetings again; need key drivers | To the Members and Observers of the IPaLM SIG of the IHTSDO: After a long hiatus due to resource constrictions from various areas, I am happy to report that this constrictions have been eased, and we are starting up the IPaLM SIG again. I have had meetings with IHTSDO leadership to figure out the best way to move forward with some of the revised structures within the IHTSDO. These discussions went very well. We will be working on the development of work plans for this SIG that are harmonized with the work plans of the IHTSDO as a whole. We continue to realize the increasing need for new concepts in SNOMED in several areas of pathology and laboratory medicine (e.g., anatomic pathology cancer protocols, molecular and genomic pathology, cytopathology). In order to get this work prioritized appropriately, I need to know the key drivers for getting specific areas of content encoded into SNOMED CT among the member countries of the IHTSDO. As a U.S. pathologist, I am familiar with most of the new regulations which require the use of SNOMED CT, but I am not familiar at all with any regulations in member countries outside the U.S.A. For the members of the special interest group who are outside the United States, I respectfully request that you send me a list of any local or national regulations/laws which mandate the use of SNOMED CT for laboratory or pathology concepts in your country. If there are particular areas in which development of additional SNOMED CT concepts would be helpful but for which there are no laws or regulations to drive their use, please let me know if there are any other drivers outside of laws or regulations which we could use in our attempts to prioritize the work. I would be grateful if you could get a list of these key drivers to me within the next two weeks (by July 1, 2014 if possible). If I do not hear from at least one representative in your member country, I will have to assume that there are no key drivers for your area. If you need more time passed July 1, please don't hesitate to let me know. Thank you very much for your time and attention, and I look forward to hearing from you soon. Sincerely, Alexis Carter, MD Chair, IPaLM SIG, IHTSDO | acarter | Fri Jun 13 13:02:35 Z 2014 | post10174 | topc6834 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: PLEASE READ - Starting IPaLM Meetings again; need key drivers | Postscript: please make your replies to this thread in the discussions section of CollabNet for the IPaLM SIG. IHTSDO leadership would like to have a copy of this information on this site. | acarter | Fri Jun 13 13:04:11 Z 2014 | post10175 | topc6834 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: PLEASE READ - Starting IPaLM Meetings again; need key drivers | In Canada we have no national regulations/laws which mandate the use of SNOMED CT for laboratory or pathology concepts. Our model in Canada, for the lab, is to use LOINC for the lab observable (question) and SNOMED CT for the coded result value (answer) when applicable. In that light, Canada has work going on in Cancer (CAP Synoptic Biomarker Reporting) in conjunction with the USA. We also have been doing a large amount of work with Microbiology result values for micro-organisms and other result values (findings) for Cultures. This work is represented by the Organisms & Infectious Diseases project and seems to be outside the scope of this SIG. We have also been looking at using SNOMED CT to identify the specimen type and recently reviewed the HL7 table 0487 specimen codes to SNOMED CT map developed in the USA. The map shows a small gap in the available SNOMED CT codes for specimen types. Looking forward to seeing the list of priorities for this group. Regards, Lorie Carey Standards SME Canada Health Infoway | lcarey | Mon Jun 16 19:32:43 Z 2014 | post10179 | topc6834 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: PLEASE READ - Starting IPaLM Meetings again; need key drivers | Dear Lorie, Thanks so much for your reply. My apologies for the delay in reply, but I was on vacation last week. This is very helpful information for us to have. I'm hoping that other members of the SIG from some of our other member countries will be able to reply to this request for information. I am trying to gather key drivers from hopefully all of our member countries that are represented on this SIG. I am aware that Australia is quite prolific in the use of SNOMED CT, but I'm not sure if this is because there are regulations attached to this or if they are just more forward thinking that the United States with regards terminology. :-) Sincerely, Alexis B. Carter, MD Chair, IPaLM SIG | acarter | Tue Jun 24 02:08:21 Z 2014 | post10208 | topc6834 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: PLEASE READ - Starting IPaLM Meetings again; need key drivers | Hi, The RCPA has been developing a variety of codesets for use in the Australian community. SNOMED CT is intended to be used for Requesting (and Report Codes). LOINC will be used for the atomic obsevations. SNOMED CT for a number of observation values - primarily Organisms. UCUM - for Units. These are the mains ones, but there are some more specialised codesets in the works too. I expect things like genetics to perhaps fall into this (HUGO). I don't think we've got something as binding as a mandate (but don't quote me on that), rather an agreement that SNOMED CT will be used. Development of the range of of code sets mentioned above, is being driven by the College; with participants from the private and public labs - so there's a degree of ownership and I'd expect adoption. Here's the link to the project deliverables, with further details nearby, - http://www.rcpa.edu.au/Library/Practising-Pathology/PTIS/APUTS-Downloads There are existing implementations of terminology and coding, but the above is part of a national standardisation approach. Matt | mcordell | Wed Jul 02 06:35:49 Z 2014 | post10258 | topc6834 |
| RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: PLEASE READ - Starting IPaLM Meetings again; need key drivers | This is great information. I hope that you all will be present for our next conference call in a few weeks. I'm looking forward to discussing this more. There appear to be more similarities between our countries than not. Sincerely, Alexis This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender by reply e-mail message and destroy all copies of the original message (including attachments). -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Cordell (ihtsdo AU) [mailto:matthew.cordell@nehta.gov.au] Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2014 2:36 AM To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo Subject: Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: PLEASE READ - Starting IPaLM Meetings again; need key drivers Hi, The RCPA has been developing a variety of codesets for use in the Australian community. SNOMED CT is intended to be used for Requesting (and Report Codes). LOINC will be used for the atomic obsevations. SNOMED CT for a number of observation values - primarily Organisms. UCUM - for Units. These are the mains ones, but there are some more specialised codesets in the works too. I expect things like genetics to perhaps fall into this (HUGO). I don't think we've got something as binding as a mandate (but don't quote me on that), rather an agreement that SNOMED CT will be used. Development of the range of of code sets mentioned above, is being driven by the College; with participants from the private and public labs - so there's a degree of ownership and I'd expect adoption. Here's the link to the project deliverables, with further details nearby, - http://www.rcpa.edu.au/Library/Practising-Pathology/PTIS/APUTS-Downloads There are existing implementations of terminology and coding, but the above is part of a national standardisation approach. Matt _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post10258 | acarter | Thu Jul 03 12:15:41 Z 2014 | post10265 | topc6834 |
| RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: PLEASE READ - Starting IPaLM Meetings again; need key drivers | Dear Alexis and All, Congratulations and apologies, these emails were escaping me in a separate folder, I was late to read... I hope to participate in the upcoming TC. I am adding "cc" Marcial and Gloria, it seems they have not got the correspondence. Is Christel Daniel informed? Warm regards, Arvydas -----Original Message----- From: Carter, Alexis B [mailto:abcart2@emory.edu] Sent: Thursday, July 3, 2014 3:16 PM To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo@csfe.aceworkspace.net Subject: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: PLEASE READ - Starting IPaLM Meetings again; need key drivers This is great information. I hope that you all will be present for our next conference call in a few weeks. I'm looking forward to discussing this more. There appear to be more similarities between our countries than not. Sincerely, Alexis This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender by reply e-mail message and destroy all copies of the original message (including attachments). -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Cordell (ihtsdo AU) [mailto:matthew.cordell@nehta.gov.au] Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2014 2:36 AM To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo Subject: Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: PLEASE READ - Starting IPaLM Meetings again; need key drivers Hi, The RCPA has been developing a variety of codesets for use in the Australian community. SNOMED CT is intended to be used for Requesting (and Report Codes). LOINC will be used for the atomic obsevations. SNOMED CT for a number of observation values - primarily Organisms. UCUM - for Units. These are the mains ones, but there are some more specialised codesets in the works too. I expect things like genetics to perhaps fall into this (HUGO). I don't think we've got something as binding as a mandate (but don't quote me on that), rather an agreement that SNOMED CT will be used. Development of the range of of code sets mentioned above, is being driven by the College; with participants from the private and public labs - so there's a degree of ownership and I'd expect adoption. Here's the link to the project deliverables, with further details nearby, - http://www.rcpa.edu.au/Library/Practising-Pathology/PTIS/APUTS-Downloads There are existing implementations of terminology and coding, but the above is part of a national standardisation approach. Matt _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post10258 _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post10265 To cancel your subscription to this discussion, please e-mail ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo-unsubscribe@csfe.aceworkspace.net | alaurinavicius | Wed Jul 09 20:05:14 Z 2014 | post10281 | topc6834 |
| RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: PLEASE READ - Starting IPaLM Meetings again; need key drivers | Dear Arvydas, Wonderful! So glad that you will be able to join us. The only people currently who we have set up to receive the notifications are the full members of the IPaLM SIG. There are a number of observers who are not getting the pushed notifications. We have not notified Dr. Daniel, but I can certainly do that provided that there is no new rule about non-member countries such as France participating (I have copied IHTSDO staff on this question). Looking forward to speaking with you. Sincerely, Alexis This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender by reply e-mail message and destroy all copies of the original message (including attachments). -----Original Message----- From: Arvydas Laurinavi?ius [mailto:Arvydas.Laurinavicius@vpc.lt] Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2014 4:05 PM To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo@csfe.aceworkspace.net Cc: marcial@cim.es; christel.daniel@crc.jussieu.fr; Gloria.Bueno@uclm.es Subject: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: PLEASE READ - Starting IPaLM Meetings again; need key drivers Dear Alexis and All, Congratulations and apologies, these emails were escaping me in a separate folder, I was late to read... I hope to participate in the upcoming TC. I am adding "cc" Marcial and Gloria, it seems they have not got the correspondence. Is Christel Daniel informed? Warm regards, Arvydas -----Original Message----- From: Carter, Alexis B [mailto:abcart2@emory.edu] Sent: Thursday, July 3, 2014 3:16 PM To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo@csfe.aceworkspace.net Subject: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: PLEASE READ - Starting IPaLM Meetings again; need key drivers This is great information. I hope that you all will be present for our next conference call in a few weeks. I'm looking forward to discussing this more. There appear to be more similarities between our countries than not. Sincerely, Alexis This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender by reply e-mail message and destroy all copies of the original message (including attachments). -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Cordell (ihtsdo AU) [mailto:matthew.cordell@nehta.gov.au] Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2014 2:36 AM To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo Subject: Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: PLEASE READ - Starting IPaLM Meetings again; need key drivers Hi, The RCPA has been developing a variety of codesets for use in the Australian community. SNOMED CT is intended to be used for Requesting (and Report Codes). LOINC will be used for the atomic obsevations. SNOMED CT for a number of observation values - primarily Organisms. UCUM - for Units. These are the mains ones, but there are some more specialised codesets in the works too. I expect things like genetics to perhaps fall into this (HUGO). I don't think we've got something as binding as a mandate (but don't quote me on that), rather an agreement that SNOMED CT will be used. Development of the range of of code sets mentioned above, is being driven by the College; with participants from the private and public labs - so there's a degree of ownership and I'd expect adoption. Here's the link to the project deliverables, with further details nearby, - http://www.rcpa.edu.au/Library/Practising-Pathology/PTIS/APUTS-Downloads There are existing implementations of terminology and coding, but the above is part of a national standardisation approach. Matt _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post10258 _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post10265 To cancel your subscription to this discussion, please e-mail ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo-unsubscribe@csfe.aceworkspace.net _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post10281 | acarter | Thu Jul 10 01:02:05 Z 2014 | post10282 | topc6834 |
| RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: PLEASE READ - Starting IPaLM Meetings again; need key drivers | Hello To help out, I have made Christel Daniel a member so notifications will be automatic. If others are not receiving notifications, they should firstly ensure they are registered (I do not see Gloria Bueno's name, for example) and then we can set permissions correctly We do not stop any countries participating in our SIGs because it is about expertise and knowledge rather than representation Regards Jane -----Original Message----- From: Carter, Alexis B [mailto:abcart2@emory.edu] Sent: 10 July 2014 02:02 To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo@csfe.aceworkspace.net Cc: marcial@cim.es; christel.daniel@crc.jussieu.fr; Gloria.Bueno@uclm.es; Fleur McBriar; Jane Millar Subject: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: PLEASE READ - Starting IPaLM Meetings again; need key drivers Dear Arvydas, Wonderful! So glad that you will be able to join us. The only people currently who we have set up to receive the notifications are the full members of the IPaLM SIG. There are a number of observers who are not getting the pushed notifications. We have not notified Dr. Daniel, but I can certainly do that provided that there is no new rule about non-member countries such as France participating (I have copied IHTSDO staff on this question). Looking forward to speaking with you. Sincerely, Alexis This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender by reply e-mail message and destroy all copies of the original message (including attachments). -----Original Message----- From: Arvydas Laurinavi?ius [mailto:Arvydas.Laurinavicius@vpc.lt] Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2014 4:05 PM To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo@csfe.aceworkspace.net Cc: marcial@cim.es; christel.daniel@crc.jussieu.fr; Gloria.Bueno@uclm.es Subject: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: PLEASE READ - Starting IPaLM Meetings again; need key drivers Dear Alexis and All, Congratulations and apologies, these emails were escaping me in a separate folder, I was late to read... I hope to participate in the upcoming TC. I am adding "cc" Marcial and Gloria, it seems they have not got the correspondence. Is Christel Daniel informed? Warm regards, Arvydas -----Original Message----- From: Carter, Alexis B [mailto:abcart2@emory.edu] Sent: Thursday, July 3, 2014 3:16 PM To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo@csfe.aceworkspace.net Subject: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: PLEASE READ - Starting IPaLM Meetings again; need key drivers This is great information. I hope that you all will be present for our next conference call in a few weeks. I'm looking forward to discussing this more. There appear to be more similarities between our countries than not. Sincerely, Alexis This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender by reply e-mail message and destroy all copies of the original message (including attachments). -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Cordell (ihtsdo AU) [mailto:matthew.cordell@nehta.gov.au] Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2014 2:36 AM To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo Subject: Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: PLEASE READ - Starting IPaLM Meetings again; need key drivers Hi, The RCPA has been developing a variety of codesets for use in the Australian community. SNOMED CT is intended to be used for Requesting (and Report Codes). LOINC will be used for the atomic obsevations. SNOMED CT for a number of observation values - primarily Organisms. UCUM - for Units. These are the mains ones, but there are some more specialised codesets in the works too. I expect things like genetics to perhaps fall into this (HUGO). I don't think we've got something as binding as a mandate (but don't quote me on that), rather an agreement that SNOMED CT will be used. Development of the range of of code sets mentioned above, is being driven by the College; with participants from the private and public labs - so there's a degree of ownership and I'd expect adoption. Here's the link to the project deliverables, with further details nearby, - http://www.rcpa.edu.au/Library/Practising-Pathology/PTIS/APUTS-Downloads There are existing implementations of terminology and coding, but the above is part of a national standardisation approach. Matt _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post10258 _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post10265 To cancel your subscription to this discussion, please e-mail ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo-unsubscribe@csfe.aceworkspace.net _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post10281 | jmillar | Thu Jul 10 07:45:53 Z 2014 | post10283 | topc6834 |
| RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: PLEASE READ - Starting IPaLM Meetings again; need key drivers | Great. Thanks so much, Jane. Sent from my Android phone using TouchDown (www.nitrodesk.com) -----Original Message----- From: Jane Millar [jmi@ihtsdo.org] Received: Thursday, 10 Jul 2014, 3:45am To: Carter, Alexis B [abcart2@emory.edu]; ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo@csfe.aceworkspace.net [ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo@csfe.aceworkspace.net] CC: marcial@cim.es [marcial@cim.es]; christel.daniel@crc.jussieu.fr [christel.daniel@crc.jussieu.fr]; Gloria.Bueno@uclm.es [Gloria.Bueno@uclm.es]; Fleur McBriar [fmc@ihtsdo.org] Subject: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: PLEASE READ - Starting IPaLM Meetings again; need key drivers Hello To help out, I have made Christel Daniel a member so notifications will be automatic. If others are not receiving notifications, they should firstly ensure they are registered (I do not see Gloria Bueno's name, for example) and then we can set permissions correctly We do not stop any countries participating in our SIGs because it is about expertise and knowledge rather than representation Regards Jane -----Original Message----- From: Carter, Alexis B [mailto:abcart2@emory.edu] Sent: 10 July 2014 02:02 To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo@csfe.aceworkspace.net Cc: marcial@cim.es; christel.daniel@crc.jussieu.fr; Gloria.Bueno@uclm.es; Fleur McBriar; Jane Millar Subject: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: PLEASE READ - Starting IPaLM Meetings again; need key drivers Dear Arvydas, Wonderful! So glad that you will be able to join us. The only people currently who we have set up to receive the notifications are the full members of the IPaLM SIG. There are a number of observers who are not getting the pushed notifications. We have not notified Dr. Daniel, but I can certainly do that provided that there is no new rule about non-member countries such as France participating (I have copied IHTSDO staff on this question). Looking forward to speaking with you. Sincerely, Alexis This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender by reply e-mail message and destroy all copies of the original message (including attachments). -----Original Message----- From: Arvydas Laurinavi?ius [mailto:Arvydas.Laurinavicius@vpc.lt] Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2014 4:05 PM To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo@csfe.aceworkspace.net Cc: marcial@cim.es; christel.daniel@crc.jussieu.fr; Gloria.Bueno@uclm.es Subject: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: PLEASE READ - Starting IPaLM Meetings again; need key drivers Dear Alexis and All, Congratulations and apologies, these emails were escaping me in a separate folder, I was late to read... I hope to participate in the upcoming TC. I am adding "cc" Marcial and Gloria, it seems they have not got the correspondence. Is Christel Daniel informed? Warm regards, Arvydas -----Original Message----- From: Carter, Alexis B [mailto:abcart2@emory.edu] Sent: Thursday, July 3, 2014 3:16 PM To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo@csfe.aceworkspace.net Subject: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: PLEASE READ - Starting IPaLM Meetings again; need key drivers This is great information. I hope that you all will be present for our next conference call in a few weeks. I'm looking forward to discussing this more. There appear to be more similarities between our countries than not. Sincerely, Alexis This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender by reply e-mail message and destroy all copies of the original message (including attachments). -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Cordell (ihtsdo AU) [mailto:matthew.cordell@nehta.gov.au] Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2014 2:36 AM To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo Subject: Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: PLEASE READ - Starting IPaLM Meetings again; need key drivers Hi, The RCPA has been developing a variety of codesets for use in the Australian community. SNOMED CT is intended to be used for Requesting (and Report Codes). LOINC will be used for the atomic obsevations. SNOMED CT for a number of observation values - primarily Organisms. UCUM - for Units. These are the mains ones, but there are some more specialised codesets in the works too. I expect things like genetics to perhaps fall into this (HUGO). I don't think we've got something as binding as a mandate (but don't quote me on that), rather an agreement that SNOMED CT will be used. Development of the range of of code sets mentioned above, is being driven by the College; with participants from the private and public labs - so there's a degree of ownership and I'd expect adoption. Here's the link to the project deliverables, with further details nearby, - http://www.rcpa.edu.au/Library/Practising-Pathology/PTIS/APUTS-Downloads There are existing implementations of terminology and coding, but the above is part of a national standardisation approach. Matt _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post10258 _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post10265 To cancel your subscription to this discussion, please e-mail ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo-unsubscribe@csfe.aceworkspace.net _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post10281 ________________________________ This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender by reply e-mail message and destroy all copies of the original message (including attachments). | acarter | Fri Jul 11 03:15:57 Z 2014 | post10285 | topc6834 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Next IPaLM SIG Conference call Doodle poll (collabnet topic id: topc4368)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Next IPaLM SIG Conference call Doodle poll | To the members and observers of the International Pathology and Laboratory Medicine Speical Interest Group (IPaLM SIG) of the IHTSDO: We will be holding our first conference call after our meeting in Sydney back in October 2011. After that, we will be able to meeting once every two months to carry forward with our planned projects. The agenda for the meeting will be posted to the collaborative space shortly along with several other documents of interest. We have had several updates since our last meeting, so it is my (Alexis Carter) hope that as many people as possible will be able to join us. Please find a link to a website called Doodle below. For those of you unfamiliar with this website, it is a quick and relative easy way to schedule international meetings and conference calls based upon participant availability. We would appreciate your response as to your availability no later than March 23rd. We look forward to meeting with you. If you need assistance with completing the poll and would like instructions, please email Mary Kennedy at mkenned@cap.org. Doodle poll link: http://www.doodle.com/uag6euhni7ugcenk | markennedy | Wed Mar 14 16:48:35 Z 2012 | post6362 | topc4368 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Instructions for using Doodle poll (collabnet topic id: topc4369)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Instructions for using Doodle poll | Please see the attached document if you need instructions for Doodle. Make sure you view the poll in your local time zone. | markennedy | Wed Mar 14 16:56:12 Z 2012 | post6363 | topc4369 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Revised IPaLM Terms of Reference (collabnet topic id: topc7312)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Revised IPaLM Terms of Reference | Dear Members of IPaLM: We have received a revised Terms of Reference from IHTSDO. Many of the changes are minor and global (apply to all of the SIGs). I have reviewed the document and find the changes to be acceptable. Please review it and let us know of any changes or issues by December 12, 2014. Please reply to this discussion so that the conversation can be tracked in CollabNet. Sincerely, Alexis B. Carter, MD Chair, IPaLM SIG | acarter | Wed Dec 03 22:26:44 Z 2014 | post10831 | topc7312 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Revised IPaLM Terms of Reference | Looks good to me . Riki Riki Merrick Vernetzt, LLC Contractor to Association of Public Health Laboratories rikimerrick@gmail.com cell: 916.216.0052 skype: riki.merrick On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Alexis Carter (ihtsdo US) <abcart2@emory.edu > wrote: > > Dear Members of IPaLM: > > We have received a revised Terms of Reference from IHTSDO. Many of the > changes are minor and global (apply to all of the SIGs). I have reviewed > the document and find the changes to be acceptable. Please review it and > let us know of any changes or issues by December 12, 2014. Please reply to > this discussion so that the conversation can be tracked in CollabNet. > > Sincerely, > Alexis B. Carter, MD > Chair, IPaLM SIG > _______________________________________________ > General Discussions > https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post10831 > | rmerrick | Wed Dec 03 22:46:37 Z 2014 | post10832 | topc7312 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Revised IPaLM Terms of Reference | The changes appear to be fine. | wscampbell | Wed Dec 03 22:57:49 Z 2014 | post10833 | topc7312 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Revised IPaLM Terms of Reference | Looks fine. Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. Original Message From: Alexis Carter (ihtsdo US) Sent: Wednesday, December 3, 2014 17:29 To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo Reply To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo@csfe.aceworkspace.net Subject: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Revised IPaLM Terms of Reference Dear Members of IPaLM: We have received a revised Terms of Reference from IHTSDO. Many of the changes are minor and global (apply to all of the SIGs). I have reviewed the document and find the changes to be acceptable. Please review it and let us know of any changes or issues by December 12, 2014. Please reply to this discussion so that the conversation can be tracked in CollabNet. Sincerely, Alexis B. Carter, MD Chair, IPaLM SIG _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post10831 To cancel your subscription to this discussion, please e-mail ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo-unsubscribe@csfe.aceworkspace.net | jcase | Wed Dec 03 23:49:50 Z 2014 | post10834 | topc7312 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Anatomical--Histo pathology procedures (collabnet topic id: topc3523)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Anatomical/Histo pathology procedures | I'm curious as to how others have handled some of the pathology tests that are traditionally requested as by stating the 'specimen' rather than the procedure... Histo is the predominate area. For example "Liver biopsy" or "FNA" Snomed CT seems to describe most of the specimen collection procedures, but doesn't have many procedures that describe the diagostic procedure for this area - which might be requested. Majority of the time performing these collection procedures are followed (almost as reflex) by the diagnostic processing - so perhaps they are considered 'one' extended procedure? (but that's more me trying to make sense of the existing content) Microbiology almost works in a similar sense, but I think the coverage of diagnostic procedures here pretty reasonable. The specimens used in histo are generally unique to histo, and the diagnistic procedure is determined by the specimen. Is a postcoordination approach using 252416005 | Histopathology test + some specimen type (or body site refinement of the tissue specimen) Look forward to hearing how others have handled this. | mcordell | Thu Aug 04 23:52:00 Z 2011 | post4995 | topc3523 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Input required regarding unit of measure (collabnet topic id: topc7489)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Input required regarding unit of measure | The IHTSDO authoring team has received a couple of SIRS requests that are asking for the creation of separate concepts for mathematically equivalent units of measure. Here are some examples: - SIRS request 400103: "The concept 'Mole/liter (qualifier value)' has several synonyms. Some of these are not correct e.g. 'Millimoles/milliliter'. 'Millimoles/milliliter' should be a separate concept and the Danish NRC has created this in our extension". - SIRS request 400101: "The concept 'Gram/liter (qualifier value)' has several synonyms. Some of these are not correct e.g. 'Micrograms per microlitre'. 'Micrograms per microlitre' should be a seperate concept". We originally rejected these requests on the basis that the pairs are mathematically equivalent. But, here is the answer from the requester: "Conceptually 'Mole/liter' and 'Millimoles/milliliter' are not the same. It is true that a conversion can be made from one to the other, but we cannot pick a single synonym when using the terminology so these concepts must be individual concepts. If your answer from April 14 is the editorial policy, concepts like 'Kilogram', 'Gram', 'Milligram' should all be synonyms - perhaps to 'tonne' :-) If we at the Danish NRC have created some of these concepts in our extension and this is modelled correctly I think this should be lifted into the international edition. If not we need to be informed that our concept is not correct and should be replaced by the concept that you create. Need advice on final correct answer please." While we agree with the requester that "Kilogram" and "Gram" are not equivalent, we consider "Mole/liter" and "Millimoles/milliliter" to be equivalent (at least mathematically, since no conversion is required for the values reported under this pair). Therefore, we forwarded the issue to the IHTSDO editorial panel. The panel's recommendation is as follows: "While there appears to be consensus that there is mathematical equivalence, there appears to be differences in opinion (from input provided to date) on conceptual equivalence. To progress this review forward input will be sort from a Pharmacy perspective (Toni), Laboratory perspective (Farzaneh) and the customer (supporting information for request) to clarify the conceptual equivalence or non equivalence." Any decision regarding the above may affect the aggregation of the results and graphing for the quantitative measurements in lab. Also, unit of measure is one of the attributes in the Observable model. We think that creating separate concepts for mathematically equivalent U of M may result in the creation of duplicate concepts. I would like to discuss this in the next call on a high priority basis: the drug project is looking at the outcome of this discussion for their purposes. Best regards, Farzaneh | fashrafi | Wed May 06 17:56:51 Z 2015 | post11189 | topc7489 |
| RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Input required regarding unit of measure | Dear Farzaneh, When you indicate that you "rejected", did you mean that you rejected as a concept or as a description (synonym)? The terms are mathematically equivalent but they are not identical. Your review committee is not evaluating these proposals in terms of use cases, which in my opinion is what they should be doing. Anything less hampers adoption, which is clearly an issue for SNOMED CT worldwide. For this particular example, please consider a drop down list which displays as millimoles/ml or natural language processing of text that contains information described as millimoles/ml. Kilogram and gram could be synonyms with a conversion factor relationship (attribute). Or they could be different concepts. There are many ways to handle this. My advice is to articulate the use cases first... Then try to solve the problem. Then there is a better chance that the proposed solution actually works in the real world! ;) Regards, Raj -------------- Raj C. Dash, MD Vice-Chair, Pathology IT Director, Laboratory Informatics Strategy Medical Director, Laboratory Information Systems Associate Professor, Department of Pathology Duke Medicine Phone: (919) 668-3352 The information in this electronic mail is sensitive, protected information intended only for the addressee(s). Any other person, including anyone who believes he/she might have received it due to an addressing error, is requested to notify the sender immediately by return electronic mail, and to delete it without further reading or retention. The information is not to be forwarded to or shared unless in compliance with Duke Medicine policies on confidentiality and/or with the approval of the sender. -----Original Message----- From: Farzaneh Ashrafi (ihtsdo staff) [mailto:fas@ihtsdo.org] Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2015 1:57 PM To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo Subject: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Input required regarding unit of measure The IHTSDO authoring team has received a couple of SIRS requests that are asking for the creation of separate concepts for mathematically equivalent units of measure. Here are some examples: - SIRS request 400103: "The concept 'Mole/liter (qualifier value)' has several synonyms. Some of these are not correct e.g. 'Millimoles/milliliter'. 'Millimoles/milliliter' should be a separate concept and the Danish NRC has created this in our extension". - SIRS request 400101: "The concept 'Gram/liter (qualifier value)' has several synonyms. Some of these are not correct e.g. 'Micrograms per microlitre'. 'Micrograms per microlitre' should be a seperate concept". We originally rejected these requests on the basis that the pairs are mathematically equivalent. But, here is the answer from the requester: "Conceptually 'Mole/liter' and 'Millimoles/milliliter' are not the same. It is true that a conversion can be made from one to the other, but we cannot pick a single synonym when using the terminology so these concepts must be individual concepts. If your answer from April 14 is the editorial policy, concepts like 'Kilogram', 'Gram', 'Milligram' should all be synonyms - perhaps to 'tonne' :-) If we at the Danish NRC have created some of these concepts in our extension and this is modelled correctly I think this should be lifted into the international edition. If not we need to be informed that our concept is not correct and should be replaced by the concept that you create. Need advice on final correct answer please." While we agree with the requester that "Kilogram" and "Gram" are not equivalent, we consider "Mole/liter" and "Millimoles/milliliter" to be equivalent (at least mathematically, since no conversion is required for the values reported under this pair). Therefore, we forwarded the issue to the IHTSDO editorial panel. The panel's recommendation is as follows: "While there appears to be consensus that there is mathematical equivalence, there appears to be differences in opinion (from input provided to date) on conceptual equivalence. To progress this review forward input will be sort from a Pharmacy perspective (Toni), Laboratory perspective (Farzaneh) and the customer (supporting information for request) to clarify the conceptual equivalence or non equivalence." Any decision regarding the above may affect the aggregation of the results and graphing for the quantitative measurements in lab. Also, unit of measure is one of the attributes in the Observable model. We think that creating separate concepts for mathematically equivalent U of M may result in the creation of duplicate concepts. I would like to discuss this in the next call on a high priority basis: the drug project is looking at the outcome of this discussion for their purposes. Best regards, Farzaneh _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post11189 | rdash | Wed May 06 18:53:33 Z 2015 | post11191 | topc7489 |
| RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Input required regarding unit of measure | Just to clarify, I believe that submissions should be accompanied with at least one use case so that the context in which a request is made can be evaluated appropriately by the review committee. The use cases will form a library of applications, which in and of itself will be a useful adjunct to the implementation guide. A balloting process that allows others to submit use cases in support of or in opposition to a request would also be useful. For this particular set of requests, I can see SNOMED serving as a facilitating mechanism for vendors of healthcare systems to implement a machine understanding of numeric equivalence in laboratory (and other) data. Regards, Raj -----Original Message----- From: Rajesh Dash, M.D. Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2015 2:53 PM To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo Subject: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Input required regarding unit of measure Dear Farzaneh, When you indicate that you "rejected", did you mean that you rejected as a concept or as a description (synonym)? The terms are mathematically equivalent but they are not identical. Your review committee is not evaluating these proposals in terms of use cases, which in my opinion is what they should be doing. Anything less hampers adoption, which is clearly an issue for SNOMED CT worldwide. For this particular example, please consider a drop down list which displays as millimoles/ml or natural language processing of text that contains information described as millimoles/ml. Kilogram and gram could be synonyms with a conversion factor relationship (attribute). Or they could be different concepts. There are many ways to handle this. My advice is to articulate the use cases first... Then try to solve the problem. Then there is a better chance that the proposed solution actually works in the real world! ;) Regards, Raj -------------- Raj C. Dash, MD Vice-Chair, Pathology IT Director, Laboratory Informatics Strategy Medical Director, Laboratory Information Systems Associate Professor, Department of Pathology Duke Medicine Phone: (919) 668-3352 The information in this electronic mail is sensitive, protected information intended only for the addressee(s). Any other person, including anyone who believes he/she might have received it due to an addressing error, is requested to notify the sender immediately by return electronic mail, and to delete it without further reading or retention. The information is not to be forwarded to or shared unless in compliance with Duke Medicine policies on confidentiality and/or with the approval of the sender. -----Original Message----- From: Farzaneh Ashrafi (ihtsdo staff) [mailto:fas@ihtsdo.org] Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2015 1:57 PM To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo Subject: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Input required regarding unit of measure The IHTSDO authoring team has received a couple of SIRS requests that are asking for the creation of separate concepts for mathematically equivalent units of measure. Here are some examples: - SIRS request 400103: "The concept 'Mole/liter (qualifier value)' has several synonyms. Some of these are not correct e.g. 'Millimoles/milliliter'. 'Millimoles/milliliter' should be a separate concept and the Danish NRC has created this in our extension". - SIRS request 400101: "The concept 'Gram/liter (qualifier value)' has several synonyms. Some of these are not correct e.g. 'Micrograms per microlitre'. 'Micrograms per microlitre' should be a seperate concept". We originally rejected these requests on the basis that the pairs are mathematically equivalent. But, here is the answer from the requester: "Conceptually 'Mole/liter' and 'Millimoles/milliliter' are not the same. It is true that a conversion can be made from one to the other, but we cannot pick a single synonym when using the terminology so these concepts must be individual concepts. If your answer from April 14 is the editorial policy, concepts like 'Kilogram', 'Gram', 'Milligram' should all be synonyms - perhaps to 'tonne' :-) If we at the Danish NRC have created some of these concepts in our extension and this is modelled correctly I think this should be lifted into the international edition. If not we need to be informed that our concept is not correct and should be replaced by the concept that you create. Need advice on final correct answer please." While we agree with the requester that "Kilogram" and "Gram" are not equivalent, we consider "Mole/liter" and "Millimoles/milliliter" to be equivalent (at least mathematically, since no conversion is required for the values reported under this pair). Therefore, we forwarded the issue to the IHTSDO editorial panel. The panel's recommendation is as follows: "While there appears to be consensus that there is mathematical equivalence, there appears to be differences in opinion (from input provided to date) on conceptual equivalence. To progress this review forward input will be sort from a Pharmacy perspective (Toni), Laboratory perspective (Farzaneh) and the customer (supporting information for request) to clarify the conceptual equivalence or non equivalence." Any decision regarding the above may affect the aggregation of the results and graphing for the quantitative measurements in lab. Also, unit of measure is one of the attributes in the Observable model. We think that creating separate concepts for mathematically equivalent U of M may result in the creation of duplicate concepts. I would like to discuss this in the next call on a high priority basis: the drug project is looking at the outcome of this discussion for their purposes. Best regards, Farzaneh _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post11189 | rdash | Wed May 06 19:07:08 Z 2015 | post11192 | topc7489 |
| Re: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Input required regarding unit of measure | Hi, The description exist as a synonym to an existing code. We rejected retiring it as a synonym and creating a new concept. Best regards, Farzaneh | fashrafi | Fri May 08 13:42:52 Z 2015 | post11196 | topc7489 |
| Re: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Input required regarding unit of measure | The issues raised by the SIRS requestor represent a relevant and important problem to address. The use of synonyms for mathematically equivalent units (ratios in this particular example) introduces ambiguity. This would be exemplified by a number paired with a ratio concept without indicating a conversion factor. Yes, the SCTID would disambiguate differing ratio concepts, but general users may not be presented with the information necessary to differentiate this in practice. This may propagate inconsistent implementation and use of SNOMED CT in this particular domain. Some questions: To what extent are the SNOMED CT concepts bound to UCUM? What precedence has been set with regards to unit of measure representation in the LOINC/SNOMED CT collaboration? | wscampbell | Fri May 08 17:15:00 Z 2015 | post11197 | topc7489 |
| RE: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Input required regarding unit of measure | Hi Scott, I am collating input from the UK Terminology centre could you please clarify the question? 'To what extent are the SNOMED CT concepts bound to UCUM ?' Is this in the context of SNOMED CT (and its history) or the LOINC agreement specifically? Another area of use to bear in mind are those reliant of UoM as they are today such as pharmacy and the synonymy. For example in the UK the dm+d (dictionary of medicines and devices) - A Pharmacy perspective as follows: All of the units used in dm+d for expressing strength or quantity are either in SCT International release or the SCT UK Drug Extension so I think that for drugs related units the coverage in SCT for expressing medicines is pretty complete. That also means that any attempt to rationalise perceived duplicates ( decimal equivalents ) would cause some pain. Equally UCUM alone would not suffice for drugs particularly in respect of expressing pack sizes or amounts prescribed. Is this a wider question than IPaLM can address alone? Kind regards Debbie. Deborah Drake Clinical Terminologist UK Terminology Centre Health and Social Care Information Centre Tel: 0113 397 4127 Mob: 07768 143086 www.hscic.gov.uk SNOMED CT - structured clinical terms for electronic health and social care records To find out more about the UK Terminology Centre (UKTC) please visit our website http://systems.hscic.gov.uk/data/uktc UK Terminology Centre Help Desk, email: information.standards@hscic.gov.uk For general enquiries please call 0300 303 5678 or email enquiries@hscic.gov.uk -----Original Message----- From: Scott Campbell (IHTSDO US) [mailto:wcampbel@unmc.edu] Sent: 08 May 2015 18:15 To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo Subject: Re: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Input required regarding unit of measure Warning: This message contains unverified links which may not be safe. You should only click links if you are sure they are from a trusted source. The issues raised by the SIRS requestor represent a relevant and important problem to address. The use of synonyms for mathematically equivalent units (ratios in this particular example) introduces ambiguity. This would be exemplified by a number paired with a ratio concept without indicating a conversion factor. Yes, the SCTID would disambiguate differing ratio concepts, but general users may not be presented with the information necessary to differentiate this in practice. This may propagate inconsistent implementation and use of SNOMED CT in this particular domain. Some questions: To what extent are the SNOMED CT concepts bound to UCUM? What precedence has been set with regards to unit of measure representation in the LOINC/SNOMED CT collaboration? _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post11197 ******************************************************************************************************************** This message may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient please inform the sender that you have received the message in error before deleting it. Please do not disclose, copy or distribute information in this e-mail or take any action in reliance on its contents: to do so is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Thank you for your co-operation. NHSmail is the secure email and directory service available for all NHS staff in England and Scotland NHSmail is approved for exchanging patient data and other sensitive information with NHSmail and GSi recipients NHSmail provides an email address for your career in the NHS and can be accessed anywhere ******************************************************************************************************************** | ddrake | Mon May 11 12:00:31 Z 2015 | post11204 | topc7489 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Input required regarding unit of measure | Further clarification regarding use case: - The request is originated by lab. The argument is that for example milligram/milliliter is equal to gram/liter (and is mathematically correct) so it’s the same concept, but people are used to using specific units and there is no doubt as to what to use in all situations. Using synonym won’t work since it won’t show its description when specifying a concept. They think that they might need a method to tag specific synonyms for display in certain situations. In the mean time they will need separate concepts. | fashrafi | Mon May 11 12:42:20 Z 2015 | post11205 | topc7489 |
| RE: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Input required regarding unit of measure | Hello- In addition to Raj and Scott's points, with the request, I'm curious how LOINC and SNOMED CT have been implemented when LOINC's units don't distinguish powers of 10, but the submitter indicates different SNOMED CT terms have been created for the different powers of 10. Understanding the use cases would help us understand if multiple entities are potentially representing the same items differently in their implementations. Interested in implementations which are achieving laboratory interoperability. Cordially, Andrea Pitkus, PhD, MLS(ASCP)CM | Product Manager, Laboratory IT | Intelligent Medical Objects, Inc. 847.613.6615 - office | apitkus@imo-online.com We provide COMMON GROUND for Health Communications that support Meaningful Use . Your Interface Terminology to ICD, CPT® and SNOMED® Notice: This message is confidential. It may also be privileged or otherwise legally protected. You may not copy this message or disclose its contents to anyone. If this communication was received in error, please notify us by reply email and delete the original message. CPT® is a registered trademark of the American Medical Association. SNOMED® and SNOMED CT® are registered trademarks of the International Health Terminology Standards Development Organisation. IMO® and Intelligent Medical Objects, Inc. are registered trademarks of IMO. All Rights Reserved. -----Original Message----- From: Drake Deborah (HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE INFORMATION CENTRE) [mailto:deborah.drake@hscic.gov.uk] Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 6:58 AM To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo@csfe.aceworkspace.net Subject: RE: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Input required regarding unit of measure Hi Scott, I am collating input from the UK Terminology centre could you please clarify the question? 'To what extent are the SNOMED CT concepts bound to UCUM ?' Is this in the context of SNOMED CT (and its history) or the LOINC agreement specifically? Another area of use to bear in mind are those reliant of UoM as they are today such as pharmacy and the synonymy. For example in the UK the dm+d (dictionary of medicines and devices) - A Pharmacy perspective as follows: All of the units used in dm+d for expressing strength or quantity are either in SCT International release or the SCT UK Drug Extension so I think that for drugs related units the coverage in SCT for expressing medicines is pretty complete. That also means that any attempt to rationalise perceived duplicates ( decimal equivalents ) would cause some pain. Equally UCUM alone would not suffice for drugs particularly in respect of expressing pack sizes or amounts prescribed. Is this a wider question than IPaLM can address alone? Kind regards Debbie. Deborah Drake Clinical Terminologist UK Terminology Centre Health and Social Care Information Centre Tel: 0113 397 4127 Mob: 07768 143086 www.hscic.gov.uk SNOMED CT - structured clinical terms for electronic health and social care records To find out more about the UK Terminology Centre (UKTC) please visit our website http://systems.hscic.gov.uk/data/uktc UK Terminology Centre Help Desk, email: information.standards@hscic.gov.uk For general enquiries please call 0300 303 5678 or email enquiries@hscic.gov.uk -----Original Message----- From: Scott Campbell (IHTSDO US) [mailto:wcampbel@unmc.edu] Sent: 08 May 2015 18:15 To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo Subject: Re: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Input required regarding unit of measure Warning: This message contains unverified links which may not be safe. You should only click links if you are sure they are from a trusted source. The issues raised by the SIRS requestor represent a relevant and important problem to address. The use of synonyms for mathematically equivalent units (ratios in this particular example) introduces ambiguity. This would be exemplified by a number paired with a ratio concept without indicating a conversion factor. Yes, the SCTID would disambiguate differing ratio concepts, but general users may not be presented with the information necessary to differentiate this in practice. This may propagate inconsistent implementation and use of SNOMED CT in this particular domain. Some questions: To what extent are the SNOMED CT concepts bound to UCUM? What precedence has been set with regards to unit of measure representation in the LOINC/SNOMED CT collaboration? _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post11197 ******************************************************************************************************************** This message may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient please inform the sender that you have received the message in error before deleting it. Please do not disclose, copy or distribute information in this e-mail or take any action in reliance on its contents: to do so is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Thank you for your co-operation. NHSmail is the secure email and directory service available for all NHS staff in England and Scotland NHSmail is approved for exchanging patient data and other sensitive information with NHSmail and GSi recipients NHSmail provides an email address for your career in the NHS and can be accessed anywhere ******************************************************************************************************************** _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post11204 | apitkus | Mon May 11 13:05:25 Z 2015 | post11207 | topc7489 |
| Re: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Input required regarding unit of measure | Hi Scott, I have forwarded your first question to the editorial panel as it's scope is bigger than the scope of lab and LOINC project. As for your second question, the quick answer is that we have not considered Unit of Measures in our mapping. I will provide a more detailed answer before the next IPaLM SIG call. Best regards, Farzaneh | fashrafi | Mon May 11 16:05:22 Z 2015 | post11209 | topc7489 |
| Re: RE: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Input required regarding unit of measure | Hi, Unit of measure representation is not in the scope of the LOINC SNOMED CT Cooperation project. The linkage between the two terminologies is based on the mapping of LOINC parts, including five or six parts of the LOINC Fully specified name (i.e. Formal name): the component or analyte measured (including component sub-parts such as challenges and adjustments), the property observed, the timing of the measurement, the type of sample, the scale of measurement, and where relevant, the method of the measurement to SNOMED CT concepts. It is worth mentioning that the example or suggested units of measure in LOINC do not seem to be consistently maintained for all quantitative measurements and often include more than one unit of measure for one term--these units of measure may or may not be mathematically equivalent. | fashrafi | Tue May 12 14:16:30 Z 2015 | post11212 | topc7489 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Input required regarding unit of measure | I agree with the decision to leave these as synonyms, and not create new concepts. For ratios/concentrations these are the same. "rhubarb 50mg/mL" is the same as "rhubarb 50g/L" Regardless of the context. it's the exact same thing. The only difference is representation - which is what a synonym is. (the units are interchangeable with no change to meaning) LOINC makes limited distinction in the units used, beyond specifying whether it's a mass or substance concentration/unit. ie. There's different LOINC codes for reporting "rhubarb 50mg/mL" and "rhubarb 50mmol/mL". However, the same LOINC code can be used for "rhubarb 50 mg/mL" & "rhubarb 0.05 g/mL" - (note these units here are NOT synoyms). Therefore specific units also need to be considered when comparing results, even if the LOINC codes are the same. As for Pharmacy. The editorial rules (at least within Australia, though I suspect these aren't unique) around what actual unit is "used" is generally determined by: - typical dose size - the magnitude of the thing being described, such that it's kept between 1 and 999 inclusive. - what the first brand to market used. - some combination of the above. Therefore depending on what 'editorial' rules are desired different units might be shown. So even non-synonymous units can be used to describe the same product. The following products are all the same thing. "rhubarb 50 mg/mL" "rhubarb 50 g/L" "rhubarb 0.05 g/mL" "rhubarb 50,000 mg/L" "rhubarb 5%" These - products - are NOT different concepts. However the preferred term may vary depending on local preferences... The scenario Raj has suggested is useful. You might want to expose all the synonyms to a user in a dropdown such as this (which is essentially a post-coordination). Such that a user selecting/entering either: "rhubarb" + "50" + "mg/mL" OR "rhubarb" + "50" + "g/L" Is coding the the same thing (ie. the expression/how these are stored are equivalent). This is something an implementer should handle. Regards, Matt Cordell | mcordell | Mon May 18 03:14:02 Z 2015 | post11222 | topc7489 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Input required regarding unit of measure | <html><head></head><body><div style="font-family: Verdana;font-size: 12.0px;"><div>Hi Matthew,</div> <div> </div> <div>Unfortunately "rubarb" is not a good substate in the context how to unify measurement in chemical pathology/clinical biochemistry.</div> <div>There are specially defined measurement values agreed internationally in dependence of the substrate going to be measured:</div> <div> </div> <div>Enzymes ....IU/l (international units/litre)</div> <div> </div> <div>Bilirubin ....umol/l (micromol/litre)</div> <div> </div> <div> </div> <div>CEA .....ug/l (micrograms/litre</div> <div> </div> <div>..... and, unfortunately there is more which I recommend to look at. </div> <div>Considerations based on equations in maths does not necessarily apply here to simplify the issue of measurement in pathology.</div> <div>Finally all the established normal values in chemical pathology/clinical biochemistry are based on the units in the given examples as above.</div> <div>Maybe we should discuss this today.</div> <div> </div> <div>Thank you for you kind attention.</div> <div> </div> <div>Georg Brox</div> <div> <div name="quote" style="margin:10px 5px 5px 10px; padding: 10px 0 10px 10px; border-left:2px solid #C3D9E5; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;"> <div style="margin:0 0 10px 0;"><b>Sent:</b> Monday, May 18, 2015 at 4:14 AM<br/> <b>From:</b> "Matthew Cordell (ihtsdo AU)" <matthew.cordell@nehta.gov.au><br/> <b>To:</b> ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo <ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo@csfe.aceworkspace.net><br/> <b>Subject:</b> Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Input required regarding unit of measure</div> <div name="quoted-content"><br/> I agree with the decision to leave these as synonyms, and not create new concepts.<br/> For ratios/concentrations these are the same.<br/> "rhubarb 50mg/mL" is the same as "rhubarb 50g/L"<br/> Regardless of the context. it's the exact same thing. The only difference is representation - which is what a synonym is. (the units are interchangeable with no change to meaning)<br/> <br/> LOINC makes limited distinction in the units used, beyond specifying whether it's a mass or substance concentration/unit.<br/> ie. There's different LOINC codes for reporting "rhubarb 50mg/mL" and "rhubarb 50mmol/mL".<br/> However, the same LOINC code can be used for "rhubarb 50 mg/mL" & "rhubarb 0.05 g/mL" - (note these units here are NOT synoyms).<br/> Therefore specific units also need to be considered when comparing results, even if the LOINC codes are the same.<br/> <br/> As for Pharmacy. The editorial rules (at least within Australia, though I suspect these aren't unique) around what actual unit is "used" is generally determined by:<br/> - typical dose size<br/> - the magnitude of the thing being described, such that it's kept between 1 and 999 inclusive.<br/> - what the first brand to market used.<br/> - some combination of the above.<br/> Therefore depending on what 'editorial' rules are desired different units might be shown.<br/> So even non-synonymous units can be used to describe the same product. The following products are all the same thing.<br/> "rhubarb 50 mg/mL"<br/> "rhubarb 50 g/L"<br/> "rhubarb 0.05 g/mL"<br/> "rhubarb 50,000 mg/L"<br/> "rhubarb 5%"<br/> These - products - are NOT different concepts. However the preferred term may vary depending on local preferences...<br/> <br/> The scenario Raj has suggested is useful. You might want to expose all the synonyms to a user in a dropdown such as this (which is essentially a post-coordination).<br/> Such that a user selecting/entering either:<br/> "rhubarb" + "50" + "mg/mL"<br/> OR<br/> "rhubarb" + "50" + "g/L"<br/> Is coding the the same thing (ie. the expression/how these are stored are equivalent). This is something an implementer should handle.<br/> <br/> Regards,<br/> Matt Cordell<br/> _______________________________________________<br/> General Discussions<br/> <a href="https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post11222" target="_blank">https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post11222</a></div> </div> </div></div></body></html> | gbrox | Tue May 19 10:57:24 Z 2015 | post11228 | topc7489 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Input required regarding unit of measure | Input from the Observables PG call 2015-05-11 "There was general agreement that adding new SNOMED CT concepts with same meaning as existing ones should not be done. From the understanding at the meeting, the issue seems to be an implementation problem and not a semantic issue. Ontologically, units are instances of quantities, e.g. the Paris kg, and thus, there should only be one SNOMED CT concept per such instance. If there are differences in e.g. precision identified by units in some contexts, that could preferably be represented by distinct techniques according to the Observables model. The group does not rule out that other solutions may be needed in other areas of SNOMED CT, such as for drugs." | fashrafi | Tue May 19 13:27:44 Z 2015 | post11231 | topc7489 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Input required regarding unit of measure | Thanks Georg, My examples were primarily aimed at just illustrate the issues with units and representations vs meaning something different. And I agree many (maybe most?) lab observations have universally agreed units, however there is variation. Both internationally: Hemoglobin may be reported in g/dL, g/L - which aren't synonyms, but the same LOINC code applies. Glucose may be reported in mg/dL or mmol/L (different LOINC codes) And within a single country. Some drug levels may be reported as umol/L by some labs and mg/L by others. So whilst not ideal, inconsistent use of units is a real problem within laboratory medicine - but at least there are increasing efforts to introduce some standardisation. Regards, Matt | mcordell | Wed May 20 06:52:43 Z 2015 | post11232 | topc7489 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Input required regarding unit of measure | Just for comparison - about the use of units by LOINCs 'European cousin', the IFCC-IUPAC NPU terminology (in use on a national scale in the Scandinavian countries): The NPU terminology distinguishes like LOINC between mass concentrations and substance concentrations, but it also specifies units for each. Result values from different sources, identified with the same NPU code, will be at least roughly comparable. There would be different NPU codes for reporting "rhubarb 50 g/L" and "rhubarb 50 mg/L". Units are SI-units, with a limited set of well-defined non-SI units allowed. Prefixes in compound units are consistently attached to the numerator unit, with the denominator unit being a SI base unit (i.e. 'mmol/L', 'g/L', never 'µmol/mL' or 'µg/µL'). This rule prevents unit synonyms. (For less well defined components (e.g. some coagulation measures), where SI units cannot be applied, NPU codes without a specified unit do exist - like the LOINC general model. Laboratories must use local arbitrary units in these cases. Result values identified by a NPU code without a specified unit cannot be assumed comparable.) Regards Ulla Magdal | upetersen | Wed May 20 13:51:53 Z 2015 | post11233 | topc7489 |
| Re: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Input required regarding unit of measure | Perhaps a tangible example concerning the topic of mass concentration synonymy may be helpful. Troponin I is a cardiac enzyme that is measured in ng/mL in the U.S. (nanograms/milliliter) A Troponin I value of > 0.40 ng/mL is indicative of a myocardial infarction (heart attack). Let’s assume that the UK measures Troponin I in micrograms/L which according the IHTSDO would be a synonym of ng/mL. A Troponin I value > 0.40 microgram/L would be the critical value in the UK in the same way that a Troponin I value of > 0.40 ng/mL is the critical value in the U.S. The mass/unit volume of Troponin I is the same in each representation. Although a result presented in units of ng/mL might seem odd to a physician in the UK, the numerical value would be interpreted in a similar fashion. This supports the IHTSDO initial opinion on synonymy for mass concentrations provided that the mass/unit volume ratio does not change with the synonym. So, I have come full circle. | wscampbell | Wed May 20 20:54:38 Z 2015 | post11236 | topc7489 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Next IPaLM SIG Conference call Doodle poll (collabnet topic id: topc4421)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Next IPaLM SIG Conference call Doodle poll | Our next meeting date is set for the below dates and times. Please check for your time zone. Conference call details are below the time zone chart. [cid:image001.png@01CD0DD2.C87EAA50] Below are the details for the conference call/web meeting on April 10th at 4 pm Central/USA. 1. Please join my meeting. https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/840220320 2. Use your microphone and speakers (VoIP) - a headset is recommended. Or, call in using your telephone. Australia: +61 (0) 2 9037 1944 Belgium: +32 (0) 28 08 9321 Denmark: +45 (0) 69 91 80 05 France: +33 (0) 182 880 780 Netherlands: +31 (0) 208 908 267 United Kingdom: +44 (0) 203 535 0611 United States: +1 (773) 945-1031 Access Code: 840-220-320 Audio PIN: Shown after joining the meeting Meeting ID: 840-220-320 Please don't hesitate to contact Mary Kennedy (mkenned@cap.org<mailto:mkenned@cap.org>) if you have any issues or problems connecting to the call. Sincerely, Alexis Chair, IPaLM SIG, IHTSDO Alexis B. Carter, MD, FCAP, FASCP Director of Pathology Informatics Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine Department of Biomedical Informatics Member, Center for Comprehensive Informatics Emory University 1364 Clifton Road NE, Room F149A Atlanta, GA 30322 WORK: (404) 712-7911 * FAX: (404) 727-1579 abcart2@emory.edu<mailto:abcart2@emory.edu> [Description: Description: medicine_logo1_blue] This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender by reply e-mail message and destroy all copies of the original message (including attachments). -----Original Message----- From: Mary Kennedy (IHTSDO US) [mailto:mkenned@cap.org] Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 12:49 PM To: ipalmsig-international_pathology_and_labo Cc: chriss@rcpa.edu.au; kyles@htrltd.com; Monika.novak@e-servis.es; grahame@healthintersections.com.au Subject: IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Next IPaLM SIG Conference call Doodle poll To the members and observers of the International Pathology and Laboratory Medicine Speical Interest Group (IPaLM SIG) of the IHTSDO: We will be holding our first conference call after our meeting in Sydney back in October 2011. After that, we will be able to meeting once every two months to carry forward with our planned projects. The agenda for the meeting will be posted to the collaborative space shortly along with several other documents of interest. We have had several updates since our last meeting, so it is my (Alexis Carter) hope that as many people as possible will be able to join us. Please find a link to a website called Doodle below. For those of you unfamiliar with this website, it is a quick and relative easy way to schedule international meetings and conference calls based upon participant availability. We would appreciate your response as to your availability no later than March 23rd. We look forward to meeting with you. If you need assistance with completing the poll and would like instructions, please email Mary Kennedy at mkenned@cap.org<mailto:mkenned@cap.org>. Doodle poll link: http://www.doodle.com/uag6euhni7ugcenk _______________________________________________ General Discussions https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/post6362 | acarter | Thu Mar 29 21:38:56 Z 2012 | post6434 | topc4421 |
IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Survey of IPaLM SIG members (collabnet topic id: topc6863)
| Title | Content | Created By | Date Created | ID | Topic ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHTSDO IPaLMSIG: Survey of IPaLM SIG members | To the members of the IPaLM SIG: Would it be helpful as part of this SIG's rejuvenation process to take a survey of our members and determine a consensus for the biggest needs in the laboratory pathology workspace? This may be very American of me, but I find surveys to be incredibly helpful in understanding the needs of the organization's members. I would suggest the following broad topics for questions: - areas of missing content - regulations driving the use of SNOMED CT - reasons outside of regulations why SNOMED CT concepts are needed, particularly in the laboratory and pathology workspace Do the members feel that this will be helpful? If the idea of a survey seems impersonal, we can schedule a conference call to discuss these issues. However, I will note that because we have a number of European and Australian members, finding a time for the meeting which is giving it for everyone is difficult (as you all know). Sincerely, Alexis B. Carter, MD Chair, IPaLM SIG | acarter | Tue Jun 24 02:15:29 Z 2014 | post10209 | topc6863 |
, multiple selections available,
Copyright © 2025, SNOMED International