Archived Collabnet Discussions

Group discussions

Latest allergy file 08--12--2011 (collabnet topic id: topc3631)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Latest allergy file 08/12/2011	This is the file we reviewed during today's meeting.	bgoldberg	Wed Aug 17 23:48:18 Z 2011	post5148	topc3631

Five more complex (>2) combined disorders (collabnet topic id: topc6921)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Five more complex (>2) combined disorders	As promised here are 5 more examples to work on independently	bgoldberg	Fri Jul 11 03:52:20 Z 2014	post10286	topc6921

Notes on allergy construction phase (collabnet topic id: topc4962)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Notes on allergy construction phase	Here are today's notes from my meeting with Monique	bgoldberg	Thu Sep 06 00:10:51 Z 2012	post7237	topc4962

Revised allergy ontology (collabnet topic id: topc3185)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Revised allergy ontology	Here are some revisions based on the discusions of the last meeting.	bgoldberg	Wed Jun 29 21:36:26 Z 2011	post4582	topc3185
Re: Revised allergy ontology	Thanks Bruce. I've posted a modest revision of this file [doc3937] to experiment with whether it's possible to generate something like the Visio Class diagram. Using Protege 4.1 and the OntoGraf plugin I was able to generate the diagram shown in [doc3938]. The static screenshot doesn't show that the role/attribute names can be shown by selecting each relationship. It was a bit fiddly to do, but not impossible, so we might want to try maintaining our working models in this environment. p.s. - I think the hasAgent relationship in the visio diagram should be reversed. I seem to recall we are yet to determine the correct flat/nested models to associate the disposition and the allergic reaction classes with the allergen. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Thu Jun 30 14:10:02 Z 2011	post4592	topc3185

Discussion of causality for complications--sequelae (collabnet topic id: topc5333)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Discussion of causality for complications/sequelae	I provided an excerpt from Art6301_Sequela (finding) and sequela of disorders-elaboration phase v1.1 in which I discuss capturing causality and temporal sequence for complications and sequelae.	bgoldberg	Sat Dec 15 19:16:19 Z 2012	post7778	topc5333

Conditions vs. Situation (collabnet topic id: topc4412)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Conditions vs. Situation	Dear ECE committee, as I told you in earlier sessions, we have had intensive discussions in the IHTSDO - WHO Joint Advisory Group whether SNOMED CE finding / disorder concepts denote 1. clinical conditions (pathological entities as being subject to the ECE work) or 2. clinical situations referring to clinical conditions We did an evaluation of a random sample of 400 SNOMED CT concepts from the disorder hierarchy, the results of which are summarized in a manuscript we submitted to AMIA 2012. I attach the paper together with a spreadsheet containing the raw data including comments of the raters on "difficult" SNOMED CT concepts. Best regards, Stefan	sschulz	Thu Mar 29 09:32:40 Z 2012	post6424	topc4412
Re: Conditions vs. Situation	Thanks Stefan The paper concludes/recommends that we should "...declare all disorder codes to have a situation interpretation...". I wonder, therefore, if we should revise the working name of our SDP disjunction class to 'situation'? It would seem unhelpful to make too much progress evolving an approach which depends on the 'condition' class only for us to re-interpret it in the near future. I'm also wondering (again) about how to accommodate 'normal' findings (any statements of 'normality' or explicit findings within expected parameters - e.g. skin color or states of mucous membranes). I think we have previously concluded that 'condition' (or, actually, situation) can encompass normality - by definition neither require abnormality or presence of pathology. It feels as though the SDP approach (with a 'condition/situation' class) could include such statements ('my cat's coat is in good condition'). I can see how statments of normality could often commit to being 'structural' (soft fontanelle) or processual (knee reflex on right normal). I'm now wondering whether statements of normality can also commit to being dispostions ('fit and well' or 'tends to plan ahead'). Ed	edcheetham	Fri Mar 30 14:06:57 Z 2012	post6443	topc4412
Re: Conditions vs. Situation	I've added some examples to Bruce's allergy OWL file to try to illustrate using actual logic axioms. Some things to note: (1) the "condition" items don't have to be pre-coordinated. They could be referenced as nested definitions. (2) the use of "only" seems to require the adoption of a classifier that goes beyond EL++ but we might find a workaround. (3) I think this model is _very_ good at elucidating what we really mean, and at throwing out the old "finding vs disorder" conundrum and replacing it with clean distinctions, as between a situation that includes a condition, versus a structure, process or disposition that is included. The examples of cough, pain, seizure, and sickle cell anemia illustrate how it works (in addition to the allergy/allergic reaction examples already included).	kspackman	Wed Apr 04 05:27:32 Z 2012	post6459	topc4412
Re: Conditions vs. Situation	Further explanations of my view of the SDP disjunction, conditions, situations, and how to solve the "finding-disorder conundrum": If we re-interpret the entire "clinical finding" hierarchy as "situation present", this means that a concept in SNOMED CT with a (finding) or (disorder) tag currently could retain the same name, but its meaning would be interpreted as follows: A clinical finding is a situation, i.e. a period of life of the subject, during which there exists (the situation "includes") some condition. Some conditions are only structures. Some conditions are only dispositions. Some conditions are only processes (events). And some conditions are disjunctions of 2 or 3: Some are either events or dispositions (see seizure and cough, below). Some are either structures or dispositions (see anemia below). And I could possibly come up with an example that is either an event or structure - can't think of one at the moment. A seizure (finding) is a period of life of the subject during which there exists some seizure condition. A seizure condition could be defined as the disjunction: seizure event OR seizure disposition. A cough (finding) is a period of life of the subject during which there exists some cough condition. A cough condition is the disjunction: coughing event OR coughing disposition. An anemia (disorder) is a period of life of the subject during which there exists some anemia condition. An anemia condition is the disjunction: circulating blood with a low level of hemoglobin (a structure) OR disposition to low hemoglobin. Abilities are dispositions. This means that "able to tie shoes (finding)" would be a period of life of the subject during which there exists the ability to tie shoes. Note that lack of ability, e.g. "unable to tie shoes (finding)" would have to be defined a a period of life of the subject during which there does NOT exist the ability to tie shoes. i.e. this would invoke a model that says something like: situation and NOT some includes "ability to tie shoes (disposition)".	kspackman	Wed Apr 04 17:36:36 Z 2012	post6470	topc4412
Re: Conditions vs. Situation	Thanks for this. Looking through in detail in preparation for tomorrow and I must confess I am struggling a bit! Recasting 'seizure (finding)' and 'cough (finding)' as described seems to me to add unwelcome complexity, not least to the age old 'which code should I use?' question. The proposal appears to require four coded representations with seizure in their name: - Seizure event () - Seizure condition - Seizure disposition () - Seizure situation ...to help us clarify a problem that began with not being sure which of the existing two (starred) to use! If this proliferation is not really required then I apologise, but if it is needed then this does not look like an attractive proposal. With the exception of the 'condition' disjunction, this looks like the 'make everything a situation' proposal from 2005 which was resisted due to the inherent disruption. On a more positive note...and perhaps reaching across to the observables project (which we occasionally do!)... Is there any value in thinking about the process/event and structure classes as 'observable', and the dispositions as 'non-observable'? I admit this line of thinking is slipping back to our 2009 'discriminatory questions' approach to dealing with existing content, but it might be of value in determining which content should be classified as each of the S,D & P disjunctions (I have in mind the standard 'allergic rhinitis' since this would seem to be a label we wish to attach to the observable phenomenon and the 'propensity' (which isn't directly observable). It might also help identify (in a kind of 'OntoClean' way) any cases where a potentially non-observable phenomenon is currently classified as the subtype of a necessarily 'observable' one . Close to Kent's post above, I wonder if this approach might finesse the proposal for 'abilities'. I agree that the 'able to...' and 'unable to would fit as dispositions, but current content includes 'does...' and 'does not...' constructs (e.g. 'does tie shoe laces'). These latter categories - as worded - would appear to be 'observable' and therefore might require different treatment. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Apr 10 15:58:31 Z 2012	post6487	topc4412
Re: Conditions vs. Situation	The OWL examples show a model of meaning. This underlies models of use, but doesn't need to get fully exposed as codes for people to choose from. For example, I agree with you - I don't think we necessarily need a separate code for seizure condition. It is logically just an "or". Event or disposition. The point I will emphasize again is that not everything in the model needs to be pre-coordinated into the terminology - only the things that we think people need. Your objections are well-taken when it comes to models of use, and we need to avoid disruption as much as possible. But something has to change, and it needs to change in the direction of having our model(s) of use founded on a model of meaning that is more faithful to reality. And I think this model of meaning avoids the confusion of the old "finding-disorder" conundrum, and helps to illustrate the reasons for lack of reproducibility. People would read a code and implicitly assume a process, or a structure, or a disposition, or a situation in which there exists one of those. And based on those implicit assumptions, they would make conflicting assessments of whether a "finding" label or a "disorder" label was appropriate. (Retinal hemorrhage -> finding or disorder? That's tough. Retinal hemorrhage -> structure, process, disposition, or situation? At least now I can tell what you are assuming when you answer).l	kspackman	Tue Apr 10 16:25:56 Z 2012	post6490	topc4412

Elaboration phase document for X with Y project (collabnet topic id: topc7110)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Elaboration phase document for X with Y project	Here it is, finally. I have borrowed heavily from Ed's excellent documents and diagrams. - thank you Ed. I have not included the current work on >3 entities. I plan to include this as an iteration in the future. Please provide feedback after which I will forward to the editors group and Kent. Bruce	bgoldberg	Thu Sep 04 00:25:02 Z 2014	post10523	topc7110

Disease Model article published (collabnet topic id: topc3076)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Disease Model article published	Schulz S, Spackman K, James A, Cocos C, Boeker M. Scalable representations of diseases in biomedical ontologies. J Biomed Semantics. 2011 May 17;2 Suppl 2:S6. Open access publication, available at: http://www.jbiomedsem.com/content/2/S2/S6/?mkt=	sschulz	Wed Jun 08 18:46:56 Z 2011	post4405	topc3076
Re: Disease Model article published	Hi Stefan Many thanks for posting this. Reading it again leaves me with my usual mixed emotions! I remain very interested in the paper's motivation (reconciling the messy needs of terminology developers with the rigour of formal ontologist), and the condition/SDP structure gives me a glimpse of something that might work, but I am still currently unable to align the proposals fully with (a) the patterns of data we have under consideration in the ECE project and (b) a duty to leave some of the prevailing and familiar patterns in SNOMED CT data unchanged. Regarding (a), I'm sure we will need to abstract away from a 'pathological' model to one which can accommodate 'all clinically-relevant entities'. Perhaps this isn't a big step, but nevertheless this is needed. By example, if we take terminology content as a proxy for recording requirements, a notion such as "248166007 \| Smartly dressed (finding)" is in scope, and indeed could be conceived of as structural (well-pressed shirt), processual (performs the act of dressing neatly) and dispositional (displays a tendency to dress smartly). Nevertheless I think it would be wrong to classify this as a 'condition'. Regarding (b), I honestly think there will be a riot if we disrupt the age-old convention of defining much of the current 'finding/disorder' content in terms of the structure involved (via finding-site=body_structure, or T-code) and what is morphologically wrong with the structure (via assoc_morph=morph_abno, or M-code). I personally think the concern that 'pleural fibrosis' isn't a kind_of 'fibrosis' is a false argument. I can easily emulate 'fibrosis (disorder)' as an appropriately constructed query, which returns pleural fibrosis without any problem. Preserving an 'axial' separation between SNOMED's 'clinical concepts' (let's call them situations with or without explicit context', or 'the stuff that goes in the record') and the body structures to which they refer is becoming familiar to many (at a critical time in SNOMED's widespread uptake) and has significant practical appeal. I am sure that an approach can be identified which preserves this familiar separation but allows recovery of/transformation to the configuration you propose. Nevertheless I will continue to argue against the general case of 'disordered structures' being kinds_of 'canonical structures' (but perhaps we need to leave room for valid 'exceptions' such as undescended testes and accessory nipples). Also: (1) I am still not sure how we would scalably implement this model (or some modification). As your paper suggests, there will be some content which necessarily declares its SDP semantics, and other content which is less clear (the 'ambiguous' concepts). Of the 'ambiguous' group, some could reasonably be all three (S, D or P), but others could only really be two. In the latter case, publishing an uncommitted 'condition' representation would be unsuitable. Perhaps we need a couple more disjunct classes to cover 'two-way' ambiguity. (2) I remain unconvinced that most valid 'dispositions' have discretely identifiable bearers (certainly following the pattern of Huntington's and trisomy 21). We are then reliant on either modelling with bare fiat assertions ('this notion is a disposition because we say it is') or defining dispositons in terms of value restrictions on their realisation. Without disjunction we can only really do this for dispositions with monotonic realisation, and even with disjunction this seems to challenge conventional boundaries of 'terminology knowledge'. Take, for example, rhematoid arthritis: one perspective on this is surely as a disposition, but (my) best current knowledge draws a blank as to how this would be defined - either in terms of its bearer or realisation. In an SDP world, would Rheumatoid arthritis have any direct association with 'joints'? Kind regards and thankyou again - perhaps we can explore this on the call 22nd June? Ed	edcheetham	Fri Jun 10 09:58:06 Z 2011	post4422	topc3076
Re: Disease Model article published	Below are Stefan's initial responses to my comments (using the convention of commenting between indented (>) original sections. We agreed that if these discussions resulted in any substantial feedback on the paper then we would use the Journal of Biomedical Semantics commenting mechanism. Kind regards Ed ######### > > Many thanks for posting this. > > Reading it again leaves me with my usual mixed emotions! > I remain very interested in the paper's motivation (reconciling the > messy needs of terminology developers with the rigour of formal > ontologist), and the condition/SDP structure gives me a glimpse of > something that might work, but I am still currently unable to align > the proposals fully with (a) the patterns of data we have under > consideration in the ECE project and (b) a duty to leave some of the > prevailing and familiar patterns in SNOMED CT data unchanged. > > Regarding (a), I'm sure we will need to abstract away from a > 'pathological' model to one which can accommodate 'all clinically-relevant entities'. I agree, and therefore "condition" seems for me a sufficiently general "umbrella" concept > Perhaps this isn't a big step, but nevertheless this is needed. By > example, if we take terminology content as a proxy for recording > requirements, a notion such as "248166007 \| Smartly dressed (finding)" > is in scope, and indeed could be conceived of as structural > (well-pressed shirt), processual (performs the act of dressing neatly) > and dispositional (displays a tendency to dress smartly). Nevertheless > I think it would be wrong to classify this as a 'condition'. The boundary between strictly medicine and human life in a broad sense is vague. Whether something qualifies as a condition in our sense, certainly depends on the need to document it and to base diagnostic or therapeutic decisions on it. For a dentist, "Smartly dressed (finding)" is probably irrelevant, for a psychiatrist or geriatrist is may be a reportable fact. I don't have a problem to subsume it under "condition", but maybe this word has additional connotations I am not aware of as a non-English speaker. We need, nevertheless, define "condition" and "health-related" or "clinical condition" a bit more precise. A condition is part of or located in a subject of care, it inheres in it, or it has it as a participant. This is clearly not the case of the well-pressed shirt (as such), but of the process of a human dressing a shirt, or the process of a human keeping his clothes clean. > Regarding (b), I honestly think there will be a riot if we disrupt the > age-old convention of defining much of the current 'finding/disorder' > content in terms of the structure involved (via > finding-site=body_structure, or T-code) and what is morphologically wrong with the structure (via assoc_morph=morph_abno, or M-code). I never thought about it in a disruptive way. The good thing of a multiple hierarchy is that it allows for multiple views. > I personally think the concern that 'pleural fibrosis' isn't a kind_of 'fibrosis' > is a false argument. I can easily emulate 'fibrosis (disorder)' as an > appropriately constructed query, which returns pleural fibrosis without any problem. > Preserving an 'axial' separation between SNOMED's 'clinical concepts' > (let's call them situations with or without explicit context', or 'the > stuff that goes in the record') and the body structures to which they > refer is becoming familiar to many (at a critical time in SNOMED's > widespread uptake) and has significant practical appeal. I would have liked to discuss these issues more before submitting the final version of the paper (and having you as a co-author, too), but there were strict time constraints as you remember. Then the current version of the paper would reflect more the position of all ECE members. But a paper is a snapshot anyway, and we can (and should) publish results of the follow-up discussion later. The fibrosis example is probably not problematic for very experienced SNOMED CT users, but it is puzzling at a first glance, because nearly everybody would intuitively assert isA between 'pleural fibrosis' and 'fibrosis'. Certainly, with appropriately constructed queries you can go a long way even with lots of idiosyncratic features in SNOMED CT. But for this you need no know it very well. What we could discuss further is whether the all clinical concepts should really be seen as "situations" (there is an ongoing discussion in the IHTSDO/WHO JAG on this). There is some evidence that shows that SNOMED CT modelers are thinking that way (otherwise it would be wrong to have, e.g. 'Ventricular septal defect (disorder)' as a parent of 'Tetralogy of Fallot (disorder)'. There are other disorder concepts where there is no evidence for this assumption (e.g. 'Diabetic foot' is not a child of 'Diabetes mellitus'). > I am sure that an approach can be identified which preserves this > familiar separation but allows recovery of/transformation to the > configuration you propose. Nevertheless I will continue to argue > against the general case of 'disordered structures' being kinds_of 'canonical structures' (but perhaps we need to leave room for valid 'exceptions' > such as undescended testes and accessory nipples). Disordered structures are never kinds of canonical structures. For instance: 'diabetic foot' isA 'canonic foot' would be simply wrong The question is how 'diabetic foot' isA 'foot' should be considered true. As I interpret SNOMED CT, the anatomy does not commit to whatsoever canonicity, because otherwise most disease definitions would be highly questionable: The fact that some disease (e.g. Hallux valgus) has finding site some anatomical structure (here: foot) , implies in most cases that that structure is not canonical any more. > (1) I am still not sure how we would scalably implement this model (or > some modification). As your paper suggests, there will be some content > which necessarily declares its SDP semantics, and other content which > is less clear (the 'ambiguous' concepts). Of the 'ambiguous' > group, some could reasonably be all three (S, D or P), but others > could only really be two. In the latter case, publishing an uncommitted 'condition' > representation would be unsuitable. Perhaps we need a couple more > disjunct classes to cover 'two-way' ambiguity. A priori, all concepts would be ambiguous with regard to SDP. The insertion of the 'Condition' node would have no impact. If there is a subconcept which can only be D or P but not S would not contradict this (in the same way as "organic compound" is under "chemical" does not contradict that the overarching node "substance" includes also inorganic compounds, which are disjoint from organic compounds). And we can't express disjointness or negation anyway in SNOMED CT. But even if logically indifferent, the insertion of additional disjunct classes is a good idea. It won't have any impact on reasoning so far, but it would make things clearer. In case SNOMED CT will be split into logically disjoint partitions in the future, it will also have computational consequences (e.g. an "S" interpretation of e.g. "Cough" would created an inconsistency. ) > (2) I remain unconvinced that most valid 'dispositions' have > discretely identifiable bearers (certainly following the pattern of Huntington's and trisomy 21). > We are then reliant on either modelling with bare fiat assertions > ('this notion is a disposition because we say it is') or defining > dispositons in terms of value restrictions on their realisation. If we accept that the property of being bearer of a disposition propagates from parts to wholes AllergicRhinitisDisposition inheresIn some NasalMucosa NasalMucosa partOf some Nose inheresIn o partOf -> inheresIn ---------------------------------------------------------- AllergicRhinitisDisposition disposition inheresIn some Nose then we can always assert the whole body being bearer of a disposition, and refine according to the advance of science. I think we are on the safe side here. > Without disjunction we can only really do this for dispositions with > monotonic realisation, and even with disjunction this seems to > challenge conventional boundaries of 'terminology knowledge'. > > Take, for example, rhematoid arthritis: one perspective on this is > surely as a disposition, but (my) best current knowledge draws a blank > as to how this would be defined - either in terms of its bearer or > realisation. In an SDP world, would Rheumatoid arthritis have any > direct association with 'joints'? > I would model it similarly: RheumatoidArthritisDisposition inheresIn some SynovialTissue SynovialTissue partOf some Joint inheresIn o partOf -> inheresIn ---------------------------------------------------------- AllergicRhinitis disposition inheresIn some Joint > Kind regards and thankyou again - perhaps we can explore this on the call 22nd June? Of course... looking forward to the meeting. What about posting your and my message on the Collabnet? Best regards, Stefan #########	edcheetham	Fri Jun 24 16:37:23 Z 2011	post4527	topc3076

eMeasure issues group meeting (collabnet topic id: topc5647)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
eMeasure issues group meeting	Requested presentation on allergy value sets.	bgoldberg	Thu Feb 21 01:53:51 Z 2013	post8168	topc5647

Top 2500 KP diagnoses for SDP analysis (collabnet topic id: topc7391)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Top 2500 KP diagnoses for SDP analysis	This file contains KP's top2500 problem list diagnoses with SNOMED, ICD-9 and ICD-10 maps. The file appears to eb arranged in roughly alphabetical order and does not contain usage data. I will try to get usage data and post a new version if I can.	bgoldberg	Thu Feb 12 17:28:21 Z 2015	post10985	topc7391

Additional file for Wed. meeting (collabnet topic id: topc4224)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Additional file for Wed. meeting	I inadvertently attached my elaboration phase draft for allergy. I am sending now just the revised class diagram.	bgoldberg	Sun Jan 22 08:26:08 Z 2012	post6094	topc4224

My completed assignment (collabnet topic id: topc7011)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
My completed assignment	Here is my take on the 5 new terms to model. I made an error in choosing the 4th item, it really is just an X with Y	bgoldberg	Tue Aug 12 05:17:58 Z 2014	post10408	topc7011
Re: My completed assignment	Please find my homework.	ygao	Tue Aug 12 15:33:43 Z 2014	post10409	topc7011
Re: My completed assignment	Please also find the slides about my thoughts on patterns for representation of multiple conditions as a situation (scope in due to, co-occurrent with).	ygao	Tue Aug 12 15:36:45 Z 2014	post10410	topc7011
Re: My completed assignment	and mine...	edcheetham	Tue Aug 12 16:08:02 Z 2014	post10411	topc7011

Pseudoallergies (collabnet topic id: topc5580)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Pseudoallergies	I have attached my latest thoughts on modeling pseudoallergies and pseudoallergic reactions. After some thought, I have resurrected our old nemesis "associated with" as a means of representing the ambiguity between the underlying substance and the pseudoallerigc disposition and reaction. I have attached an owl file and 2 screenshots illustrating how the disjoint class, allergy or pseudo allergy to substance alonfg with associated with some particular drug can retrieve the appropriate term even if one does not know if the drug is related to an allergic or a pseudoallergic state.	bgoldberg	Wed Feb 13 07:03:01 Z 2013	post8096	topc5580

Meeting this week II (collabnet topic id: topc3756)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Meeting this week II	Ed, in preparation for meeting this week, I have attached 3 files. The first is a revised version of the owl file containing the updated made to the class diagram last week. The second is a slide contrasting our proposed class model with the current SNOMED model with suggestions for reconciling the two The third is a draft agenda for the Sydney meeting.	bgoldberg	Tue Sep 27 02:45:33 Z 2011	post5355	topc3756

Updated SDP allergy owl file (collabnet topic id: topc4427)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Updated SDP allergy owl file	This incorporates the latest updates to the model	bgoldberg	Sun Apr 01 17:45:06 Z 2012	post6449	topc4427

XwithYSyndrome20130710 (collabnet topic id: topc6019)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
XwithYSyndrome20130710	Here is my work on this this	bgoldberg	Wed Jul 31 22:20:54 Z 2013	post8780	topc6019
Re: XwithYSyndrome20130710	Thanks Bruce Here's mine (independent of your work). Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Thu Aug 08 13:38:41 Z 2013	post8795	topc6019
Re: XwithYSyndrome20130710	Here is my spreadsheet. Best regards, Stefan	sschulz	Fri Aug 09 10:31:28 Z 2013	post8798	topc6019

Files for today's meeting (collabnet topic id: topc4684)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Files for today's meeting	2 owl allergy files and the x with y spreadsheet (I was only able to get to the first 100).	bgoldberg	Wed Jun 13 19:51:41 Z 2012	post6818	topc4684

Most recent diagram (R4) of allergy classes (collabnet topic id: topc3054)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Most recent diagram (R4) of allergy classes	This is the diagram we were working on during the last meeting	bgoldberg	Wed May 25 21:43:25 Z 2011	post4335	topc3054

ECE XYZ model in OWL (collabnet topic id: topc6375)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
ECE XYZ model in OWL	Based on my understanding from last two months, I represented the patterns for X with Y and caused by Z in Protege. The purpose is to help me to understand the relationships between these patterns. The attribute 'associated with' or 'associated finding' are not used because it might cause confusion with its current usage. Your comments are much appreciated.	ygao	Wed Jan 15 16:52:39 Z 2014	post9422	topc6375
Re: ECE XYZ model in OWL	Dear Yongsheng, this comes close to our ideas, the only fundamental difference (you already addressed in you comments) is that the range of DUE TO and AFTER is always a situation. Otherwise the changes would be very disruptive, as you would have to introduce nested expressions (apart from role groups), which is not supported by the current concept model, or we would have do introduce defined condition concepts, which would lead to proliferation of concepts and confusion of the users. See details below: 1. added Disjointness axiom between condition and situation 2. added Domain / range restrictions 3. added RoleGroup as parent relation of 'HAS CONDITION', just as a reminder. 4. remodeled OLD VERSION: 'Situation X after Y' equivalentTo Situation and (AFTER some 'Condition Y') and ('HAS CONDITION' some 'Condition X') NEW VERSION: 'Situation X after Y' equivalentTo Situation and ('HAS CONDITION' some 'Condition X') and (AFTER some 'Situation Y') Reason: a condition could also be a continuant, for which "after" or "following" cannot be applied. Furthermore there are normally no SNOMED concepts for Condition 5. Situation X co-occurrent with Y: added an alternative, but semantically equivalent definition 6. Situation X due to Y: again, the argument of 'Due To' should be a situation: NOT: 'Situation X due to Y' equivalentTo Situation and ('HAS CONDITION' some 'Condition X') and ('DUE TO' some 'Condition Y') BUT INSTEAD: 'Situation X due to Y' equivalentTo Situation and ('HAS CONDITION' some 'Condition X') and ('DUE TO' some 'Situation Y') OTHER POSSIBILITY: 'Situation X due to Y' equivalentTo Situation and ('HAS CONDITION' some ('Condition X' and 'DUE TO' some 'Situation Y')) but this would require nesting. 7. For the same arguments as above NOT 'Situation X due to and co-occurrent with Y' equivalentTo Situation and (('HAS CONDITION' some 'Condition Y') and ('HAS CONDITION' some 'Condition X')) and (('HAS CONDITION' some 'Condition X') and ('DUE TO' some 'Condition Y')) BUT 'Situation X due to and co-occurrent with Y' equivalentTo 'Situation X' and 'Situation Y' and ('DUE TO' some 'Situation Y') 8. I also added morphologies and body parts to demonstrate how conditions correspond to what is inside the role groups 9. TO DISCUSS (both makes sense, ontologially, but the second second solution would require nesting. 'Situation X caused by Z' equivalentTo Situation and ('CAUSATIVE AGENT' some 'Entity Z') and ('HAS CONDITION' some 'Condition X') OR Situation X caused by Z equivalentTo Situation and ('HAS CONDITION' some ('Condition X' and 'CAUSATIVE AGENT' some 'Entity Z')	sschulz	Wed Jan 15 18:03:56 Z 2014	post9425	topc6375
Today's Call	Dear all, I will probably not be available for today's call, but I hope my reply to the OWL model is detailed enough. I will be able to respond to question by e-mail during the next hour Cheers, Stefan	sschulz	Wed Jan 15 18:05:55 Z 2014	post9426	topc6375
Re: ECE XYZ model in OWL	Many thanks to Stefan's feedback. After discussion at the meeting, I have refined the OWL file and included example codes. All 7 types (type 0 - 6) are presented in CAPITAL LETTER, e.g. SITUATION X DUE TO SITUATION Y (type 2). Condition X, Y, Z or Situation X, Y, Z are artificial and they are only for presenting abstract patterns. They are not used for concept modeling. However, the relationship between situations are directional for Due to, After and Causative agent. Type 0 represents conditions that they can be interpreted as situations. Type 1 - 6 represent different type of situations Please find the attached OWL files for three different options to represent X with Y caused by Z patterns. The hierarchies and modelings are different in these options because of representation of conditions and situations. These options also demonstrate the transformation from ontological analysis to the extended interpretation and implementation. Kind regards, Yong	ygao	Mon Feb 24 13:21:33 Z 2014	post9653	topc6375
Re: ECE XYZ model in OWL	The OWL file for Condition with Situation interpretation.	ygao	Mon Feb 24 13:27:12 Z 2014	post9654	topc6375
Re: ECE XYZ model in OWL	The OWL file for Situation only representation.	ygao	Mon Feb 24 13:28:19 Z 2014	post9655	topc6375

X with Y caused by Z demo in OWL (collabnet topic id: topc6554)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
X with Y caused by Z demo in OWL	Please find the updated OWL file for Situation representation. The patterns are presented in capital letters. The annotation of label shows the current FSN in SNOMED CT. The annotation of FSN demonstrates the proposed term patterns.	ygao	Thu Mar 13 13:52:55 Z 2014	post9705	topc6554

X with Y complex patterns - examples in OWL (collabnet topic id: topc7266)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
X with Y complex patterns - examples in OWL	X with Y complex patterns - examples in OWL, ECE meeting in Amsterdam	ygao	Fri Oct 24 20:17:01 Z 2014	post10738	topc7266
Re: X with Y complex patterns - examples in OWL	Added conventional modelling of X dueTo Y examples.	ygao	Tue Oct 28 11:36:33 Z 2014	post10742	topc7266

New allergy owl file (collabnet topic id: topc4799)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
New allergy owl file	File contains an expanded qualifier value hierarchy as suggested during last meeting	bgoldberg	Wed Jul 11 14:07:24 Z 2012	post6994	topc4799

Some thoughts on syndromes and compound conditions (collabnet topic id: topc4755)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Some thoughts on syndromes and compound conditions	Dear all In preparation for tomorrow's call I've been trying to work through a few 'syndrome' concepts from [doc5919] and [doc5918] to try and understand how they might be modelled. I'm not sure I am much the wiser as a result, but here are a few thoughts. (1) Is SNOMED CT's main organising principle 'causal' or 'manifestational'? Not sure. It's probably somewhere in between, but it might be good if we could have a preference. The working preference to classify X due to Y as a kind of X suggests to me that we are thinking 'manifestationally', but the way we can realistically handle complex and multisystem disorders as well as those traceable to discrete chromosomal abnormalities suggests a 'causal' component. Taking the three proximate concepts: 190905008 Cystic fibrosis (disorder) 86204009 Immotile cilia syndrome (disorder) 42402006 Kartagener syndrome (disorder) All are kinds of 233661002 Inherited mucociliary clearance defect (disorder), and my reading of things is that it is the motility disorder which is ultimately responsible for the major structural manifestations of Kartagener's. Cystic fibrosis has a mixed picture of subtypes and associations; CF of the lung is regarded as a specialisation, whilst fibrosing colonopathy is modelled as associated_with CF. A hard-nosed 'manifestation' view could be that 'pancreatic fibrosis in cystic fibrosis' is not a kind_of cystic fibrosis (it's due_to CF), and perhaps (classical) Kartagener's syndrome should be due_to 'immotile cilia syndrome' (not is_a). (2) 281867008 Multisystem disorder (disorder) I wonder if this concept could become our friend. In particular if we recast it as 'any disorder which can manifest in multiple systems and we may well have not captured all the manifesting features'. Firstly we could perhaps better represent a few more of those troublesome concepts such as 'psoriasis' and 'rheumatoid arthritis'. Instinctively these should be skin and joint disorders respectively, but I recall that both have variants which only involve atypical tissues. Perfectly standard 'cutaneous psoriasis' would then be as it is currently modelled, but with a 'due_to' passing to this site-neutral psoriasis class. Secondly, there are syndromes/complex disorders with a handful of 'always present' features, but also a long tail of 'sometimes present'. Historically the latter features have been regarded as out-of-scope for reference terminology representation, and I'm not rushing to challenge this convention, but by asserting is_a Multisystem disorder we might be able to indicate that our formal definition excludes features which are sometimes present. (3) Augmented retrieval strategies As previously discussed, the above mixture of due_to and is_a relationships could create a muddle with regard to retrieval. My instinct is (and I've got a browser to test it) is that many retrieval questions are best answered by treating is_a and due_to (well, it's inverse actually) as transitive. that way a query looking for all kinds of cystic fibrosis needs to look for subtypes and the origins of any incoming 'due_to' relationships. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Jun 26 15:38:51 Z 2012	post6919	topc4755

X ic disorders (collabnet topic id: topc4807)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
X ic disorders	An interesting example of the issue of interpretation of combined disorders of the form, Xic opathy/itis is the following: Contrast our old favorite Diabetic retinopthy with 81318004, Hemorrhagic colitis The former term consists of a disposition (diabetes) followed by it's manifestation (retinopathy) and may be interpreted as retinopathy due to diabetes and thus a subtype of retinopathy but not of diabetes (which we at Kaiser at least are comfortable with) The latter term consists of a manifestation (hemorrhage) followed by a disposition (colitis). This can also be interpreted as hemorrhage due to colitis which would thus make this a subtype of hemorrhage but no one here was comfortable with this, feeling this is definitiely a type of colitis (with bleeding as it's manifestation) Perhaps (and I would need to confirm this with more content), if the manifestation appears first in the string, the term should be considered a subtype of the disposition (with a new hasManifestion attribute linking the two) and if the disposition appears first, a subtype of the manifestation (with the exisiting due to attribute linking the two).	bgoldberg	Thu Jul 12 18:21:43 Z 2012	post7003	topc4807

complex combined disorders for modeling (collabnet topic id: topc7264)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
complex combined disorders for modeling	Attached is a spreadsheet with 5 terms we can use for the modeling exercise. The first tab is an example of how to approach the modeling. The second tab contains the working terms	bgoldberg	Thu Oct 23 17:47:41 Z 2014	post10736	topc7264

X with Y morphologies (collabnet topic id: topc5329)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
X with Y morphologies	Quick question which may have some relationship to our X with Y (finding/disorder) discussion. It has been pointed out that we have morphology values (used in concept definitions) such as “fracture with displacement”. We also have the individual components such as “Displacement” and “Fracture” as asserted supertypes (which, in turn, are used in concept definitions). I would be interested in exploring the risks and benefits of regarding “fracture with displacement” as the logical conjunction of the two components, and the consequences of making such combination values 'fully defined' in the data. Extreme examples include "fracture, closed, comminuted, with displacement" and another 'combination pattern' is illustrated by 'Deposition of coal and silica'. I can expand on this on the call. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Dec 12 20:22:51 Z 2012	post7772	topc5329
Re: X with Y morphologies	Here's another example: Most 'diverticulitis' disorder concepts are modelled with: 116676008\|Associated morphology (attribute)\|=18126004\|Diverticulitis (morphologic abnormality)\| This morphology value is primitive, but is defined as: IsA=31113003 \| Diverticulum (morphologic abnormality) IsA=23583003 \| Inflammation (morphologic abnormality) Now, 67153004 \| Diverticulitis of ileum (disorder) is defined in terms of both the above values, and is NOT a subtype of 307496006 \| Diverticulitis (disorder). This could be corrected in a few ways - one of them could be to make 18126004\|Diverticulitis (morphologic abnormality)\| fully-defined in terms of its two supertypes. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon Dec 17 17:00:06 Z 2012	post7783	topc5329

X_with_Y_proposal_draft_20140223 (collabnet topic id: topc6552)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
X_with_Y_proposal_draft_20140223	X with Y proposal with updated section on naming conventions	bgoldberg	Thu Mar 13 02:11:31 Z 2014	post9702	topc6552

Files for next meeting Nov 28 (collabnet topic id: topc5209)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Files for next meeting Nov 28	I have attached an archive containing some examples of combined disorder terms as well as my inception and elaboration phase documents for artf6301 sequelae (finding) and sequelae of disorders	bgoldberg	Thu Nov 15 00:34:15 Z 2012	post7586	topc5209

new .owl file (collabnet topic id: topc4538)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
new .owl file	There was an error in the file I just posted along with the class diagram. Here is the fix	bgoldberg	Wed May 09 18:07:37 Z 2012	post6618	topc4538

Files for today's ECE meeting (collabnet topic id: topc6036)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Files for today's ECE meeting	Atatched are a proposal for possible models for pseudaollery and analysis of delteing the due to allergic reaction attribute value pair from allergic conditions	bgoldberg	Wed Aug 14 07:07:06 Z 2013	post8808	topc6036

Pseudoallergy and allergy concept models (collabnet topic id: topc5646)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Pseudoallergy and allergy concept models	Thinking more about Stefan's proposal to model pseduoallergy by role grouping after pseudoallergic reaction with causative agent, I wanted to clarify a few points. I have mentioned in the past (but perhaps not strongly enough) that an allergic sensitization does not necessarily result in an allergic disposition. Rather, for an allergic disposition to occur, it must be preceded by an allergic sensitization. A practical example of this is food allergy. Both allergic sensitization and the allergic disposition to foods can be objectively assessed, the former by allergy skin or blood tests and the latter by oral challenge tests. Published data has confirmed the poor correlation between positive allergy skin and blood tests and oral challenges. Thus, for an allergic disposition to be appreciated, two process must have occurred: the sensitization plus a prior reaction. Based on Stefan's suggestion for pseudo allergic dispositions I am wondering whether allergic dispositions should have an additional role group of after allergic reaction+causative agent.	bgoldberg	Thu Feb 21 01:50:24 Z 2013	post8167	topc5646

Template for X with Y test concepts (collabnet topic id: topc5775)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Template for X with Y test concepts	Here is what I put together. I filled in 2 rows as an illustration.	bgoldberg	Thu Mar 21 01:31:51 Z 2013	post8347	topc5775

Elaboration phase document for X with Y project (collabnet topic id: topc7165)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Elaboration phase document for X with Y project	Revisions/adds as per last call	bgoldberg	Tue Sep 16 21:12:04 Z 2014	post10581	topc7165

Owl file for allergy classes (collabnet topic id: topc3053)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Owl file for allergy classes	Here is my attempt to recreate (at least some of) the class diagram we have been working on for allergies as an OWL ontology. I am not very experienced in OWL or Protege so please forgive any innacuracies. At least the ontology seemed to classify properly.	bgoldberg	Wed May 25 21:36:57 Z 2011	post4334	topc3053
Re: Owl file for allergy classes	Hi Bruce For info, experimentation and comparison, I note a couple of OWL files over on the observables project at this link: https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/doc3749 Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon Jun 06 09:30:15 Z 2011	post4395	topc3053

Latest edited allergy owl file (collabnet topic id: topc3677)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Latest edited allergy owl file	Contains some additional edits since last meeting	bgoldberg	Wed Sep 07 18:15:18 Z 2011	post5230	topc3677

Additional comments on allergies (collabnet topic id: topc4410)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Additional comments on allergies	I think the main use case at least for allergies in terms of differentiating pathologic structures/dispositions and processes is to distinguish between an acute event (process) and a disposition to an acute event Thus, an ER doc sees a patient who is experiencing anaphylaxis within minutes of eating peanuts. He records a diagnosis of anaphylaxis due to peanuts and refers to allergy for confirmation and future management. I see the patient and confirm that the patient is allergic to peanut. I record a diagnosis of anaphylaxis to peanut although what I am representing is the disposition and the ER doc, the process. This could perhaps be addressed by considering what I am trying to represent as a situation i.e H/O anaphylaxis to peanut and the term anaphylaxis (or anaphylactic reaction) to mean the process/event or as discussed Is A anaphylaxis to peanut (uncommitted – disposition or process) Is A disposition vs. Is A anaphylaxis to peanut (uncommitted – disposition or process) Is A pathologic process Or the more problematic approach of using defining roles to represent the disposition vs. process. This still does not address the representation of concepts that currently reside under the allergic disorder hierarchy i.e. allergic rhinitis. As I previously mentioned, there was general discomfort at the Sydney meeting in saying that e.g. allergic rhinitis is a pathologic structure. Certainly, it can be characterized by existence of pathologic structures such as edematous turbinates but it is not in itself a pathologic structure. Allergic rhinitis thus may be a process in which an individual has been exposed to an allergen and has acutely started sneezing. Whether allergic rhinitis can be a disposition is questionable. A genetically disposed i.e. atopic individual may have a disposition to develop rhinitis, asthma and/or eczema but not one specific disorder. One can’t say that a patient with seasonal allergic rhinitis out of the season and thus asymptomatic is disposed to develop seasonal allergic rhinitis. The condition seasonal allergic rhinitis exists whether the patient is exposed to the allergen or not. Contrast this with anaphylaxis which does not exist in the absence of the allergen. In addition, I don’t see a particular value in distinguishing between the disorder allergic rhinitis and the process. Therefore visio. diagram here Lastly, we have discussed representing allergic reactions (processes) in the event hierarchy.	bgoldberg	Wed Mar 28 19:27:12 Z 2012	post6421	topc4410

Examples of x with y patterns represented using Allen's time intervals - revised (collabnet topic id: topc7313)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Examples of x with y patterns represented using Allen's time intervals - revised	This is a revision of this presentation based on a discussion between Ed and myself during today's ECE meeting.	bgoldberg	Thu Dec 04 01:12:32 Z 2014	post10835	topc7313

Slides for Representation of multiple conditions as a situation (collabnet topic id: topc7047)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Slides for Representation of multiple conditions as a situation	Please find an updated version of slides following the discussion at the last meeting. The diagrams have been simplified by using directional arrows to represent due to and/or co-occurrent with relationships. The boxes for relationships are removed. The patterns are still not complete because the possible combinations could be greater than 333. However, we can easily add new patterns and diagrams while we are analysing examples.	ygao	Wed Aug 27 20:23:42 Z 2014	post10458	topc7047

Revised allergy class diageam and .owl file for todays discussion (collabnet topic id: topc4537)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Revised allergy class diageam and .owl file for todays discussion	Revised files based on last meeing decisions	bgoldberg	Wed May 09 17:56:58 Z 2012	post6617	topc4537

milk eczema_BG revisions 20110630.owl (collabnet topic id: topc3599)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
milk eczema_BG revisions 20110630.owl	revisons include additional classes and definitions to align with Stefan's paper "Scalable representations of diseases in biomedical ontologies	bgoldberg	Sun Aug 14 19:59:04 Z 2011	post5103	topc3599
Re: milk eczema_BG revisions 20110630.owl	some early comments: „hasOutput“ vs. „hasOutcome“ not clear what is the difference „hasOutcome“, according to the definition has its range restricted by process participants. Process participants, however, at least in BioTop, cannot be dispositions. Proposal: Instead of AllergicSensitization equivalentTo AllergicCondition and (has Agent some Allergen) and (hasOutcome some AllergicDisposition) AllergicSensitization equivalentTo AllergicCondition and (has Agent some Allergen) and (hasOutcome some (bearerOf some AllergicDisposition)) I would also substitute hasOutput by hasOutcome in the following AllergicAsthmaticReaction equivalentTo AllergicReaction and (hasAgent some Allergen) and (hasOutput only AllergicAsthma) -- > AllergicAsthmaticReaction equivalentTo AllergicReaction and hasOutcome only AllergicAsthma (has Agent… is inherited) Furthermore: AllergicAsthma subclass of PathologicStructure I will start now to align your example with BioTopLite	sschulz	Wed Aug 17 14:17:28 Z 2011	post5137	topc3599
Re: milk eczema_BG revisions 20110630.owl	Dear Bruce and others, I have packed together the milk allergy example with a minimal parts of BioTopLite, thus including disjoints and domain / range restrictions. The only correction needed was to fuse hasOutput with hasOutcome and, with the latter, to replace the dispositon by the bearer of a disposition in one case. In the future this example could import BioTop or BioTopLite (rather than be fused with it). Best regards, Stefan	sschulz	Wed Aug 17 15:03:52 Z 2011	post5138	topc3599
Re: milk eczema_BG revisions 20110630.owl	Stefan, thanks for your suggestions. I am not sure where "has output" came from. We may have used it as a placeholder at the the time in lieu of coming up with a formal relation.	bgoldberg	Wed Aug 17 18:48:07 Z 2011	post5147	topc3599

Bruce's 3rd phase review (collabnet topic id: topc5951)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Bruce's 3rd phase review	Here is mine	bgoldberg	Tue Jun 25 15:40:04 Z 2013	post8677	topc5951

Updated elaboration phase document for artf6166 X with Y, X due to + slide deck from today's authoring meeting (collabnet topic id: topc7221)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Updated elaboration phase document for artf6166 X with Y, X due to + slide deck from today's authoring meeting	Some updated tables in the elaboration phase document, along with a brief discussion of X without Y and some minor corrections.	bgoldberg	Tue Oct 07 22:35:44 Z 2014	post10668	topc7221

Relationship between ECE and observables work (collabnet topic id: topc2926)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Relationship between ECE and observables work	Please follow the association below to a comment and slide set that Kent has posted to the Observables project in relation to the association between findings/conditions and observation results. Ed	edcheetham	Tue Mar 22 10:29:24 Z 2011	post4000	topc2926

Allergy documents for Oct 2013 IHTSDO meeting (collabnet topic id: topc6106)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Allergy documents for Oct 2013 IHTSDO meeting	I created a draft agenda as well as a presentation for the allergy part of our meeting. Please review and provide feedback. Thank you.	bgoldberg	Thu Sep 05 01:00:16 Z 2013	post8942	topc6106

X with Y test: Stefan's ratings (collabnet topic id: topc5803)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
X with Y test: Stefan's ratings	see attachment	sschulz	Wed Apr 03 13:00:45 Z 2013	post8395	topc5803

Revisesd list Top 2500 KP problem list diagnoses with usage for SDP analysis (collabnet topic id: topc7392)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Revisesd list Top 2500 KP problem list diagnoses with usage for SDP analysis	Here is a revised list showing usage counts sorted highest to lowest.	bgoldberg	Thu Feb 12 17:46:13 Z 2015	post10986	topc7392

allergic disorder descendants (collabnet topic id: topc4459)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
allergic disorder descendants	Reviewing Kent's modifications of my owl file in which he provides some instructive examples of pathologic structures, I again do not feel any of the descendants of allergic disorder fit comfortably as types of pathologic structure. The examples given appear to be specifically abnornal organs/tissue//cells/substances. The only entity that to me is clearly an allergic structure in this context is allergen-specific IgE. The descendants of allergic disorder would therefore appear to be situations that include an allergic condition which may be either a disposition or process depending on whether the allergen is present at the time the condition is observed. This brings up the question of how to define allergic reaction if we say that allergic disorders are uncommited dispostions or processes. I also wonder whether allergic process should be expanded to include not only allergic reactions but allergic events, the former representing what is occuring at the moldecular level and the latter the physical manifestions.	bgoldberg	Wed Apr 11 19:26:17 Z 2012	post6494	topc4459
Re: allergic disorder descendants	I wonder if part of the "...allergic disorders aren't types of pathologic structure..." problem here is that (as we've previously discussed) pathologic structures are the mongrel combination of a structure and a morphological (often implicity processual) abnormality. Linking in with Stefan's response [post6423] to your earlier related post, it's as if the "process has_outcome only structure" is too simplistic, and what we actually want to think about (if not fully represent) is the reaction process 'preceding' (and 'causing') an (e.g.) inflammation process in a structure which ultimately has_output a 'structure with the quality of being inflamed'. So, perhaps (as you have found in testing), allergic disorders should never be regarded 'just structures', but are either a process or disposition or a structure (a name for the thing that happens, the threat of it happening or the structural consequence of it happening). I'm least comfortable about including the last one, but to say that there is no place for referring to conditions as just 'structures' seems a bit extreme at the moment. Ed	edcheetham	Fri Apr 13 15:50:26 Z 2012	post6504	topc4459

Additional comments about pseudoallergy (collabnet topic id: topc5718)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Additional comments about pseudoallergy	The attached document contains some additional comments about the proposed pseudoallergy model and some information about NSAIDs as agents of both pseudoallergy and allergy	bgoldberg	Sun Mar 03 19:08:51 Z 2013	post8264	topc5718
Re: Additional comments about pseudoallergy	Thanks Rob. You are correct in that there have been no confirmed cases of anaphylaxis to ASA but presumably allergic urticaria and angiodema have been observed. The reference I used is the following: http://allergycases.blogspot.com/2010/07/allergic-and-pseudoallergic-reactions.html	bgoldberg	Mon Mar 04 17:13:49 Z 2013	post8270	topc5718
Re: Additional comments about pseudoallergy	Thanks for all this work and hard thinking Bruce I'm concerned that there may be unintended consequences of introducing this 'good science' and 'good ontology' to distinguish between allergy and pseudoallergy when it comes down to the simplest use case of allergic trigger avoidance. We might be OK, but we will have reference data where the defining pattern differs between allergy and pseudoallergy on two counts: whether the "agent of manifestation" is represented in a role grouped relationship whether the "agent of manifestation" is referenced by an associated_with or a causative_agent relationship. Both probably don't matter, but I would like to work through the anticipated modes of use of affected content. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Mar 06 11:21:29 Z 2013	post8285	topc5718

Revised elaboration phase document Artf 6262_Allergic_state_-_Immune_hypersensitivity_disorder-elaboration_phase_v3.0 (collabnet topic id: topc5735)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Revised elaboration phase document Artf 6262_Allergic_state_-_Immune_hypersensitivity_disorder-elaboration_phase_v3.0	Please review new section 7.2 (appendix pages 23-26) on pseudo allergy. Thanks.	bgoldberg	Thu Mar 07 04:24:50 Z 2013	post8288	topc5735

Should anatomy classes in SNOMED refer to canonical anatomy ? (collabnet topic id: topc3628)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Should anatomy classes in SNOMED refer to canonical anatomy ?	There was such discussion in one of the last ECE calls, and I think this issue is important enough to follow it up, even in this group, because ECE concepts refer to anatomical entities. In my opinion, axioms on anatomy concepts should be valid under either assumption, i.e. SNOMED anatomy concepts are meant to contain both canonic and non-canonic instances. Let us take the example of liver: The concept "Liver normal (finding)" refers via FindingSite to "Liver Structure (body structure)", just as the concept "Lesion of liver (finding)", or "Acute hepatitis (disorder)". It is obvious that here different kinds of livers are meant. If "Liver Structure (body structure)" denoted canonical liver structures only, how could we define hepatitis? I believe that an explicit statement "In SNOMED CT the same anatomy concepts can denote both intact and damaged anatomical entities" would create clarity, and it would have very limited impact on the anatomy architecture intended by future redesign activities.	sschulz	Wed Aug 17 15:19:08 Z 2011	post5139	topc3628
Re: Should anatomy classes in SNOMED refer to canonical anatomy ?	I agree with the intent of the statement, but it might require exceptions. One exception might be the location of structures modeled in SNOMED's anatomy, which should be the canonical location, and thus any structure that is in a non-canonical location must not be a subclass of the structure that is modeled as being in the canonical location. If we say that a transplanted kidney is a subclass of kidney, and that the kidney is necessarily located in the canonical location (retroperitoneal abdomen), then we get a contradiction when instances of transplanted kidney are located in the pelvis (for example). The solution would be to say a transplanted kidney is an organ that is derived-from a kidney but located-in a different place.	kspackman	Wed Aug 17 17:12:13 Z 2011	post5143	topc3628

Examples of x with y patterns represented using Allen's time intervals (collabnet topic id: topc7272)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Examples of x with y patterns represented using Allen's time intervals	I put together a small set of examples to stimulate discussion on how we may be able to use Allen's interval algebra to help decide between patterns 2, 3 and 4	bgoldberg	Wed Oct 29 11:44:41 Z 2014	post10751	topc7272

Revised Visio allergy file (collabnet topic id: topc4280)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Revised Visio allergy file	Please review and revise further as necessary	bgoldberg	Thu Feb 16 04:48:02 Z 2012	post6215	topc4280

An additional 5 complex concepts to model (collabnet topic id: topc6953)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
An additional 5 complex concepts to model	Here are 5 more	bgoldberg	Thu Jul 24 02:31:51 Z 2014	post10333	topc6953

Meeting this week (collabnet topic id: topc3755)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Meeting this week	Ed, in preparation for meeting this week, I have attached 3 files. The first is a revised version of the owl file containing the updated made to the class diagram last week. The second is a slide contrasting our proposed class model with the current SNOMED model with suggestions for reconciling the two The third is a draft agenda for the Sydney meeting.	bgoldberg	Tue Sep 27 02:45:01 Z 2011	post5354	topc3755
Re: Meeting this week	Thanks Bruce These are great. The comparison slide is excellent. This might also help us identify those changes which could be introduced with minimal fuss, and distinguish them from the more disruptive aspects of the proposal. I would also like to spend a bit of time today considering: - how we distinguish those 'disorder/reaction' concepts which would be modelled as "IsA condition" rather than commiting them to one of the subclasses. - the likely modelling impact of changes on each of the subtypes of the 'top-level' allergy classes, in particular in the absence of nested definitions. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Sep 28 10:58:24 Z 2011	post5369	topc3755

Draft naming conventions for conjunctiva patterns (collabnet topic id: topc6519)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Draft naming conventions for conjunctiva patterns	These are located at the end of the attached document	bgoldberg	Sun Feb 23 19:08:54 Z 2014	post9650	topc6519
Re: Draft naming conventions for conjunctiva patterns	Apologies for the misspelling should be conjunctive patterns	bgoldberg	Sun Feb 23 19:22:35 Z 2014	post9651	topc6519

Follow-up to today's meeting (collabnet topic id: topc4411)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Follow-up to today's meeting	Good discussion today. I still have some concerns however. If we are saying that most if not all of the children residing under Immune hypersensitivity disorder can be disordered structures or processes, I am wondering about the current relations between allergic reaction (process) and allergic disorder involving hasOutcome and OutcomeOf . These properties relate a process to a non-processual entity. Therefore how can an allergic reaction (process) have an outcome of an allergic condition (process)? Do we need to be more precise and relate the outcome of an allergic reaction specifically to an allergic structure?	bgoldberg	Thu Mar 29 01:55:25 Z 2012	post6422	topc4411
Re: Follow-up to today's meeting	Dear all, apologies for missing the meeting yesterday. I had had a long workday and I was too tired at 10pm. > Therefore how can an allergic reaction (process) have an outcome > of an allergic condition (process)? Do we need to be more precise > and relate the outcome of an allergic reaction specifically to an > allergic structure? I agree we should be more precise. Two processes can related directly by the relation "precedes" or "caused_by", but one process cannot be the outcome of another one. Of course, the outcome of one process can be a participant of the second process. I would be happy if we could base our discussions on an OWL model rather than a visio diagram, because in OWL we can check constraints and compute entailments. Best regards, Stefan	sschulz	Thu Mar 29 08:58:44 Z 2012	post6423	topc4411
Re: Follow-up to today's meeting	I will update the owl model and post this weekend. Thanks.	bgoldberg	Thu Mar 29 17:00:35 Z 2012	post6425	topc4411

Slides for X with Y complex patterns (collabnet topic id: topc7265)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Slides for X with Y complex patterns	Draft slides for X with Y complex patterns, ECE meeting at Amsterdam 2014	ygao	Fri Oct 24 20:14:32 Z 2014	post10737	topc7265
Re: Slides for X with Y complex patterns	Added screenshots of examples in inferred view.	ygao	Tue Oct 28 12:40:31 Z 2014	post10743	topc7265

Revised allergy class diagram based on Ed and Bruce discussion May 9, 2012 (collabnet topic id: topc4541)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Revised allergy class diagram based on Ed and Bruce discussion May 9, 2012	Expanded model incorporating other disorders of immune function. Owl file will be revised pending feedback on this.	bgoldberg	Thu May 10 00:22:22 Z 2012	post6621	topc4541

Meeting this week III (collabnet topic id: topc3757)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Meeting this week III	Ed, in preparation for meeting this week, I have attached 3 files. The first is a revised version of the owl file containing the updated made to the class diagram last week. The second is a slide contrasting our proposed class model with the current SNOMED model with suggestions for reconciling the two The third is a draft agenda for the Sydney meeting.	bgoldberg	Tue Sep 27 02:47:12 Z 2011	post5356	topc3757

Interesting discussion in SHRD project... (collabnet topic id: topc5706)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Interesting discussion in SHRD project...	There's an interesting discussion going on in the SHRD project regarding what looks to me like a tension between modelling options to support an allergy use case and a prescribing use case (both reliant upon subtance organising principles) [topc5704]. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Mar 01 10:18:26 Z 2013	post8251	topc5706

Allergy presentation for IHTSDO (collabnet topic id: topc5111)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Allergy presentation for IHTSDO	This is a powerpoint illustrating the steps undertaken to create the current model for allergic conditions in SNOMED. Feedback wis appreciated.	bgoldberg	Tue Oct 09 05:30:14 Z 2012	post7441	topc5111

X with Y proposal draft with addition of after sub pattern (collabnet topic id: topc6029)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
X with Y proposal draft with addition of "after" sub pattern	As requested I added an additional paragraph regarding an "after" sub pattern of pattern 2 anal;ogous to "causative agent"	bgoldberg	Wed Aug 07 22:05:48 Z 2013	post8792	topc6029
Re: X with Y proposal draft with addition of "after" sub pattern	I did some minor edits and shifted the passage that discusses the 2 vs. 3 pattern rather to the end of the document. I also consolidated changes. Best, Stefan	sschulz	Thu Aug 08 10:29:48 Z 2013	post8794	topc6029
Re: X with Y proposal draft with addition of "after" sub pattern	Thanks Bruce. Here updated further with a draft causative agent pattern (4). Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Aug 14 12:06:25 Z 2013	post8810	topc6029
Re: X with Y proposal draft with addition of "after" sub pattern	Thanks Stefan - apologies, didn't notice this before - I shall attempt to reconcile all our changes, but probably not before today's call. Ed	edcheetham	Wed Aug 14 13:46:00 Z 2013	post8811	topc6029
Re: X with Y proposal draft with addition of "after" sub pattern	First, apologies for not following very closely in the recent past. But second, most important, my strong endorsement of the proposal. I think this is definitely going in the right direction. And finally, regarding pattern 4 vs 2 or 3, I think role chain might work, i.e. using role-chain, due-to o direct-substance -> causative-agent. This would have to be universally true in order to use this solution. We could also consider GCIs [which are on the requirements list for support in the tooling and RF2] in case the role chain is not universally applicable. The GCI would be applied in each case where it is true. It is possible to do this via template across multiple similar concepts. E.g. Clause 1: X due to Yvaccine = X causative-agent Yvaccine Clause 2: X due to Yvaccine = X due-to (administration of vaccine, direct-substance = Yvaccine)	kspackman	Wed Aug 28 17:35:00 Z 2013	post8884	topc6029

New version of completed assignment (collabnet topic id: topc7013)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
New version of completed assignment	Hi all. I am posting a new version of my completed assignment as it seems that I completely missed the "peritonitis" past of the 4th concept.	bgoldberg	Tue Aug 12 18:40:04 Z 2014	post10413	topc7013

Pseudoallergies2 (collabnet topic id: topc5610)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Pseudoallergies2	Attached is another simplified OWL file in which hypersensitivity is regarded as the disjunction of allergy and pseudo allergy. Again querying on hypersensitivity disposition or hypersensitivity reaction and associated with a particular drug brings up the appropriate allergy or pseudo allergy to that drug.	bgoldberg	Sat Feb 16 16:28:12 Z 2013	post8128	topc5610

Revised allergy classes visio file (collabnet topic id: topc3186)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Revised allergy classes visio file	Here is a revised file based on the discussions of the last meeting	bgoldberg	Wed Jun 29 21:38:16 Z 2011	post4583	topc3186

Documents for Wed. meeting (collabnet topic id: topc4223)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Documents for Wed. meeting	I have attached my latest inception phase document (still not final) addressing the issues with combined clinical concepts to hopefully better define the scope of this part of the project. I am also sending the revised allergy class diagram for discussion during our meeting in 3 weeks. At that time I would like to review the correctness of some of the proposed attributes (hasLocus, bearer, hasOutcome) and readdress the model for allergic disorders.	bgoldberg	Sun Jan 22 08:06:47 Z 2012	post6093	topc4223

Fuiles for IHTSDO meeting (collabnet topic id: topc7246)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Fuiles for IHTSDO meeting	I am posting a presentation on allergy and a spreadsheet containing several example complex combined situations for the upcoming meeting	bgoldberg	Tue Oct 14 23:57:51 Z 2014	post10708	topc7246

Complex combined disorders (collabnet topic id: topc6681)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Complex combined disorders	I am attaching some examples I had been working on recently	bgoldberg	Thu Apr 24 00:43:51 Z 2014	post9891	topc6681

Update on allergy model construction phase (collabnet topic id: topc5062)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Update on allergy model construction phase	Notes from my meeting with Monique Van Berkum on 9/12/2012	bgoldberg	Tue Oct 02 23:42:35 Z 2012	post7388	topc5062

Updated allergy class diagram (collabnet topic id: topc4370)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Updated allergy class diagram	This version adds a discrete pathologic structure class as a child of pathologic structure or process	bgoldberg	Thu Mar 15 03:43:44 Z 2012	post6364	topc4370

Some more allergy updates (collabnet topic id: topc3778)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Some more allergy updates	Ed, et.al. I have made some revisions to the allergy ontology and class diagram 1. I removed inheresIn relationship between allergic disposition and immune system structure 2. I removed AllergenSpecific_IgE_BoundTo_Mast_cells clas as being superfluous at this time 3. I added hasLocus between allergic process and immune system structure 4. I made allergic sensitization primitive and added a sublass of IgE mediated allergic sensitization. I think the outcome of IgE mediated allergic sensitization is allegen-specific IgE which is a bearer of allergic disposition. Analogously, allergen-specific Th1 memory cells would be the outcome of a cell-mediated allergic sensitization. I could not come up with a structure that would encompass all kinds of allergic sensitizations which is why I made allergic sensitization primitive and removed it’s hasOutcome relation. I hope these changes make sense. I have attached a Powerpoint presentation, summarizing our work thus far.	bgoldberg	Sun Oct 02 21:50:15 Z 2011	post5384	topc3778
Re: Some more allergy updates	Great thanks Bruce - in particular for making a start on realigning the proposal with the perspective presented in Stefan's paper. I've taken a look at this too, and have taken the liberty of adding a new slide (6) which considers a slightly different integration model. As such (along with sprinkling a bit more colour): 1. I've removed the 'allergic condition class'. I would hope that we could integrate the SDP model without having to introduce lots of 'condition' classes. 2. I was tempted to direct the allergic disposition and process classes to their committed sub-types only [I think we've already decided these have to be dispositions and processes]. However, I've left the Is_A disorder 'dashed lines'because I remember we concluded these would have to be there during any modular/gradual SDP integration - so that allergies are still returned kinds_of 'adverse reaction propensity'. This would make the SDP approach 'additive' to the current SNOMED CT model. 3. I've added a couple of 'allergy disorder' classes, and with the dotted lines indicated how 'allergic urticaria' (which we generally think of as the 'red skin' structural abnormality) could also be cast - at the time an instance record entry is made, as either a record of an active 'urticaria process' being observed (countable event), or as being 'that disposition which repeatedly manifests as urticaria' (continuant disposition). 4. I've indicated by the pink background box a layer of organiser classes which we talk about, but might not be routinely included in a systematic representation. I'm conscious that this doesn't deal with the perennial finding/disorder distinction (if I throw 'neutropenia (finding) and neutropenia (disorder)' at this pattern I'm left with a feeling that I need something less disease/disorder committed at the 'middle' of the model (the sky blue classes) - perhaps we can discuss this. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Oct 04 11:33:41 Z 2011	post5407	topc3778
Re: Some more allergy updates	Ed, regarding your statement "However, I've left the Is_A disorder 'dashed lines'because I remember we concluded these would have to be there during any modular/gradual SDP integration - so that allergies are still returned kinds_of 'adverse reaction propensity'. This would make the SDP approach 'additive' to the current SNOMED CT model." It still seems to me that 'adverse reaction propensity' would naturally be considered a disposition as well. "Propensity" seems to imply that.	bgoldberg	Wed Oct 05 06:25:51 Z 2011	post5419	topc3778
Re: Some more allergy updates	Thanks Bruce I absolutely agree, but there may be other areas where the SDP approach is applied/tested where the ancestry is less clear. I would rather describe an approach which can be 'modularised. Ed	edcheetham	Wed Oct 05 15:51:04 Z 2011	post5425	topc3778

Modeling examples from today's meeting (collabnet topic id: topc5253)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Modeling examples from today's meeting	Attached are the annotated examples we discussed today.	bgoldberg	Thu Nov 29 00:22:59 Z 2012	post7658	topc5253

Allergy model owl file (collabnet topic id: topc5141)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Allergy model owl file	Updated interim allergy model in owl format	bgoldberg	Wed Oct 24 07:21:50 Z 2012	post7490	topc5141

Here is mine (collabnet topic id: topc5801)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
Here is mine	My take on the X with Y test concepts	bgoldberg	Wed Apr 03 03:17:48 Z 2013	post8393	topc5801

GeneralProjectGroup__Notifications

IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday April 16th 20:00 UTC for 1.5 hours (collabnet topic id: topc6652)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday April 16th 20:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Dear all We have a call this Wednesday where I hope that we can: (1) discuss latest draft of X with Y document [doc7179] and its suitability for adoption by clinical authors. (2) consider options for guidance on >2 conditions in a composite concept. (3) consider the submission document to the content committee [TBD]. GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Apr 15 14:49:16 Z 2014	post9847	topc6652
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday April 16th 20:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	First draft of CC submission document posted to [doc10194] for discussion on call. Ed	edcheetham	Wed Apr 16 15:54:53 Z 2014	post9860	topc6652
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday April 16th 20:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Brief notes from call Wednesday April 16th and follow-up from Content Committee discussion. Present on call Bruce Goldberg Yongsheng Gao Ed Cheetham Rob Hausam Apologies Paul Amos The meeting was spent confirming our stance on how to present the X with Y work the Content Committee. Feedback from Content committee: There was widespread acceptance that the X with Y patterns approach should be tested/adopted during routine authoring discussions The next project call will be arranged for 14th May @ 21:00 UTC (1.5 hours) when we will: a) discuss how best to introduce the X with Y process into routine authoring (in particular support, assurance and feedback aspects) b) discuss further how to handle >2 component combination concepts. c) consider how to advance allergy (or other event/condition distinctions) over the summer cycle. Please note this is 1 hour later than usual to accommodate an unanticipated preceding call. Hope this is OK this time and I shall see how best to deal with this clash. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon May 12 12:54:21 Z 2014	post9938	topc6652

IHTSDO ECE PG: Conference call 20th April 2011 - 20:00 UTC. (collabnet topic id: topc2974)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Conference call 20th April 2011 - 20:00 UTC.	Dear all Following on from last month's discussion, and consistent with the date proposed in [topc2936] we have a project call on Wednesday 20th April 2011 - 20:00-22:00 UTC. Draft agenda: (1) brief project recap (2) brief collabnet recap - especially "folder monitoring" (3) MAIN TOPIC allergy/allergic reaction model discussion (Bruce) - most recent working version of draft model at [doc1997] (4) AOB Call Instructions – Usual IHTSDO call instructions (attached), Line #2 Passcode 54362# Desktop Sharing GoToMeeting ID: TBA Comments welcome. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Apr 19 09:54:32 Z 2011	post4109	topc2974
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Conference call 20th April 2011 - 20:00 UTC.	Dear all Here are the GoToMeeting details for this call: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/990728977 Meeting ID: 990-728-977 In addition, I've provided an association link to the Google-based conference line schedule. This was announced some time ago but I must confess I missed it. Ed	edcheetham	Wed Apr 20 09:40:03 Z 2011	post4113	topc2974
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Conference call 20th April 2011 - 20:00 UTC.	Notes from conference call 20110420 (many thanks to those who participated): Present on call: Bruce Goldberg Cathy Richardson Kent Spackman Rob Hausam Ed Cheetham Points of discussion. (1) A brief project recap (summarising items in scope) - current emphasis will probably coincide with items in Bruce's 'consultant programme' portfolio [allergy & 'X with/without Y'] (2) The group were reminded to check that they were monitoring all the discussion forums in order to receive notifications, and the conference line calendar link was shared. (3) Allergy/allergic reaction Starting from a simplified version of the sensitisation/allergy/reaction/allergy disorder class model, Bruce and the group worked through the nature of each class (both in the abstract and in the specific) and the nature and direction of relationships between them. Points of note included: As a necessary precursor of both an assertion of allergy (disposition) and the development of various allergic disorders (abnormal structures) the allergic reaction class (process) - essentially characterised as an interaction between agent-specific IgE and the agent/epitope itself would appear to be the 'dominant class' in the model. Each sensitisation (process) class could also be viewed as a necessary precursor of an allergy (disposition), but (during the call, at least) it was felt that these classes would be used so little that they should not be required for the definition of each allergy, and should be created as required for recording using a (currently unspecified) compositional representation. Has_agent relationships should strictly be limited to 'process classes', which would strictly-speaking disrupt the defining link between X allergy and X substance. This approach may be a bit too radical (certainly when compared to some standard SNOMED CT-based allergy representations, so it is likely that a compromise solution would be needed. Substances and epitopes. There is currently minimal support for epitope and cross-sensitivity representation. It may be possible (by, for example, recasting a substance such as 'milk' in terms of 'the set of epitopes found in/on milk') to support, by simple subsumption, a simple representation of any 'agent' and more specific named epitope representations. Bearing in mind the potential continuum for some 'allergens' from organisms/dietary representations of organisms/substances in these organisms, any proposal will need to liaise with both the organism and substance redesign projects. The relationship between the structural/physiological class definitions used for 'manifestation' (process) and 'allergic disorder' (structure) and actual clinical notions (eczematous reaction, allergic dermatitis) needs further elaboration. (4) Next call - May 4th, or 18th 20:00-22:00 see separate post. Comments welcome Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Thu Apr 21 09:23:30 Z 2011	post4115	topc2974
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Conference call 20th April 2011 - 20:00 UTC.	Apologies - Jon Patrick was also in attendance on the call - sorry Ed	edcheetham	Thu Apr 21 09:37:08 Z 2011	post4117	topc2974

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 17th April 2013, 20:00 - 22:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc5828)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 17th April 2013, 20:00 - 22:00 UTC	Dear all Here are the details of the call for 17th April 20:00 UTC 1. Further consideration of testing experience of patterns in X with Y proposal document [doc7179] - Documents at doc7985, topc5803, topc5801 & doc8105 (synthesis of three individual ones). 2. Update on "pollen and pollen allergen" proposal 3. Consider allergy to combination products +/- allergy discussion on SHRD project [topc5706 and post8379] GoToMeeting: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/618262448 Meeting ID: 618-262-448 As for last time, I've set this call up for us to use the GoToMeeting VoIP. However, just, in case, I have also arranged for an IHTSDO conference line. Conference call [dial-in details at [doc6192]): IHTSDO Line; #3 Passcode: 54362 Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon Apr 15 12:36:06 Z 2013	post8440	topc5828
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 17th April 2013, 20:00 - 22:00 UTC	Belated notes from call: Present on call: Stefan Schulz Bruce Goldberg Rob Hausam Ed Cheetham Main topics discussed: Further review of the testing experience of patterns in X with Y proposal document [doc7179] - Documents at doc7985, topc5803, topc5801 & doc8105 (synthesis of three individual ones). Some modest changes to the way the responses were represented corrected some of the apparent inter-rater variation. Main differences still appear to be: (1) between pattern 2 and pattern 3 options where causation is not merely an injurious antecedent event. (2) between pattern 2/3 and a simple 'causative agent' pattern where a material entity is involved as the agent of causation. Particular attention was paid to '219391000 \| War injury due to fragments from shrapnel' (and further inspection on how notions such as 'shrapnel' were represented (implicitly, as morphological abnormalities and as physical objects - all largely unrelated). Regarding item (1), the main take-home message was to regard pattern 2 as the 'safest' option (co-ocurrence not assumed or necessary). Regarding item (2), a degree of consistency emerged which might be summed up as 'use causative agent where the means of introduction of the material entity of the body was not significant'. So, for example, poisoning by a metal mineral or a radioisotope would be represented using causative agent. On the other hand, where concept represents the damaging consequence of the (often traumatic) introduction of an equally heavy metal object (such as shrapnel or a bullet), a preferred option would be to represent the concept in a pattern 2 (or 3) to an event which represented the mechanism of introduction - which in turn would reference the material entity (tho' ? how). So, 'liver tear by bullet' would include a "liver tear" and a "gunshot injury with bullet" (where the latter references the bullet). In the case of a "foreign body granuloma" the mechanism of introduction would not be known, so a causative agent pattern would suffice. Finally there was a suggestion that we needed a fourth pattern (or perhaps an exotic pattern 3) which allowed for co-dependence (A with B: Is_A A, Is_A B, Due_to A, Due_to B). Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed May 01 16:06:23 Z 2013	post8507	topc5828

IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: Next (August & September) ECE call dates (collabnet topic id: topc3540)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: Next (August & September) ECE call dates	Dear all Apologies for the long period of radio silence - hopefully enough of you are still interested to reignite this project in the run-up to the Sydney meetings! Amongst other items in the June minutes [post4526] were the following tasks: (iii) Bruce to post the most recent [allergy] model (iv) all to consider the current model and compare its properties with the candidate use cases (or others) listed in 2b above. (v) attempt to test discussing/developing the draft model in OWL/Protege rather than Visio [For interest, the OntoGraf plugin in Protege 4.1 gives a pretty neat real-time visualisation of modelling changes]. Bruce posted his models [topc3186 and topc3185], and for interest I would urge those of you of a 'visual' persuasion to have a play with the OntoGraf plugin with the OWL version. Whatever, we need to arrange some calls prior to the Sydney meeting (in the draft schedule we have a half day session with Bruce leading the allergy & related topic discussion). I've had a brief exchange with Bruce about this, and it would be great if we could use August and September calls to... (1) clarify and document the use cases which the allergy model is intended to support (2) systematically test the model against these use cases - and only modify it where problems are encountered (3) use the Sydney meeting to finalise a model proposal. If that sounds like fun, then I woud be interested to know your availability for the following dates (sticking with Wednesdays @ 20:00 UTC as per usual): 17th August 24th August 31st August 7th September 21st September Ideally we should try to get three calls in before Sydney. Many thanks for any feedback Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Aug 05 15:48:58 Z 2011	post5018	topc3540
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: Next (August & September) ECE call dates	I can make any of the dates except for August 31.	bgoldberg	Fri Aug 05 18:11:57 Z 2011	post5020	topc3540
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: Next (August & September) ECE call dates	Dear all Based on posted and personal feedback I shall arrange calls for the following dates: 17th August 7th September 21st September @20:00 UTC (2 hrs each). Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Aug 09 13:53:36 Z 2011	post5056	topc3540

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday October 23rd 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours (collabnet topic id: topc6209)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday October 23rd 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Dear all As noted in the brief follow-up notes to the Washington meeting, we have arranged a conference call 21:00 UTC on Wednesday 23rd October. Topics to discuss include: - Follow-up on any actions from the Washington meeting - Planning and conduct of X with Y testing work GoToMeeting details are the same as for previous calls: Meeting ID: 692-600-464 https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/692600464 Telephony will be VoIP only Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Oct 22 15:38:21 Z 2013	post9129	topc6209
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday October 23rd 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Dear all I regret that I'm not going to be able to host the project call today/tonight. Many apologies for the short notice. Hopefully I/we can catch up over the next week by correspondence, and resume meetings in two week's time. Kind regards and apologies once again. Ed	edcheetham	Wed Oct 23 16:50:09 Z 2013	post9140	topc6209

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday September 25th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours (collabnet topic id: topc6150)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday September 25th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Dear all We have an ECE project call on Wednesday September 25th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours (to follow any terminology editors call if happening) Agenda: (1) Bruce & Stefan - feedback regarding discussions on the 'aspirational allergy model'. (2) Ed - feedback on: (a) progressing the test plan document and produce slides for same (b) slides for most recent draft of patterns doc (c) firm up agenda for Washington. (3) Paul - prepare Diabetic complication examples and pollen allergy materials (incl Jim case work item). (4) Rob - may bring examples to call for discussion GoToMeeting details should be the same as last time: Meeting ID: 692-600-464 https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/692600464 Telephony will be VoIP only Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Sep 24 15:01:08 Z 2013	post9023	topc6150
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday September 25th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Dear all I've posted a draft agenda (extending Bruce's earlier draft) as [doc8968]. As an AOB today I'd like to remember to talk about how we can 'do' GoToMeeting VoIP in a meeting (not sure how well this works with just laptop microphones/speakers. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Sep 25 11:25:32 Z 2013	post9026	topc6150

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 12th December 2012 21:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc5298)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 12th December 2012 21:00 UTC	Dear all We have a project group call booked for Wednesday 12th December. Topics for discussion: Continue analysis of examples [topc5253] drawn from existing documents Please note: I've set the call up for 21:00 hours and will launch the GoToMeeting at that time, however I suspect that I will be otherwise occupied until approximately 21:30 when I'll be able to join the call myself. Sorry about this - hopefully things will work! Conference call: Line; #2 Passcode: 54362 (Dial in numbers at [doc6192]) GoToMeeting: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/540839713 Meeting ID: 540-839-713 Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Dec 07 14:19:55 Z 2012	post7727	topc5298
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 12th December 2012 21:00 UTC	Notes from call: Present on call: Ed Cheetham Bruce Goldberg Paul Amos Main topic of discussion: More examples worked through from document at [post7658]. Further reinforcement of the patterns discussed in the previous call: A due to B == [where A 'tends to be' a manifestion, and B 'tends to be' dispositional (but far from exclusively)] Pattern 1: IsA A IsA B Due_to B Pattern 2: IsA A Due_to_and_coexistent_with B Pattern 3: IsA A Due_to B Pattern 3 was probably the prevailing pattern during the last decade of modelling (hence diabetic retinopathy is not a kind of diabetes), but lots of recent discussion leans towards pattern 1 being preferable (e.g. to improve sensitivity of queries for the causative phenomenon). BG & PA supportive of this stance [and SS has supported this based on ICD 11 discussions], however EC remains uncomfortable with this approach [reasons: modest extension of retrieval reasoning allows Due_to relationships to be treated as IsA relationships - at the discretion of the analyst - much harder to reverse this process if IsA relationships are hard-wired into the data. Pericarditis associated with infectious mononucleosis (disorder): Quick review of the literature suggested that this may be concurrent or may be post infectious. Inspection of related 'pericarditis' concepts indicate that a simpler (additional) pattern needs to be considered when the 'causal phenomenon' is infective - A Causative_agent B [Pattern 4]. Hernia, with obstruction (disorder): The specific example of 'hernia, with obstruction' was discussed. This has long caused problems because it is very likely that the intended retrieval pattern would be to declare that this truly is both A and B (not IsA obstruction, Due_to Hernia). Some speculation (based on discussions around 'necrosis' that perhaps when A with B includes a B which describes 'compounding morphology' (e.g. necrosis, obstruction') then these should at least be defined in terms of IsA A + IsA B. Planned date for next meeting is 9th January 2013 - 21:00 UTC. Further discussion on X with Y topic. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon Dec 24 16:42:02 Z 2012	post7806	topc5298

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Monday 21st September at 20:00 UTC for 1.5 hours. (collabnet topic id: topc7634)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Monday 21st September at 20:00 UTC for 1.5 hours.	Dear all Just to confirm, there will be an ECE call on Monday 21st September at 20:00 UTC for 1.5 hours. Things we need to discuss are: (1) Review of call from Monday 3rd August 20:00 UTC [post11420] (2) Planning for meeting in Montevideo - topics to cover, materials to prepare and call sequence between now and then. (3) Time! Following on from the last call where we discussed how best to represent 'disorder during procedure' constructs, there has been some correspondence suggesting various options. In preparation for this I have done a few things: (a) I have re-read and posted the Allen paper [doc13034] (I'm trying to get more general access to the Time-related EN document too). (b) I have looked through the current 'formal' references to time in SNOMED CT: i. Temporal context (time relation between phenomenon described and documentation) ii. Associated with/after (time relation between two (or more) described phenomena) iii. Occurrence (time relation between described phenomenon and 'phase of life') (I know this has been done better in the past by others, but I think the contributions may have been lost on the old 'BaseCamp' discussion site). (c) Whatever, based on i and ii, I have been looking in greater detail at the idea 'typical reference hierarchies' [introduced in section 5 of the Allen paper]. To date we have something a bit like this for the occurrence values, but we should probably explore whether it is a realistic option for other ideas such as 'intraoperative'. To that end I've looked at the 'pre-', 'ante-', 'peri-', 'intra-' and 'post-' words in the current SNOMED CT data, and published my raw outputs at [doc13035]. Basically only a small subset are time-related (far more are anatomical), and interestingly the main Allen-like sets (e.g. -operative, -natal, -partum, -menstrual) are sort of anticipated in the SNOMED CT data beneath 307142001 \| Temporal periods (qualifier value) (e.g. '277671009 \| Intraoperative (qualifier value)'). I wouldn't pretend that this is the 'right' way to deal with 'disorder during procedure' (it doesn't deal with 'disorder after specific procedure - and there are plenty of these) but (a) we need a clear understanding of how i, ii and iii above should relate to one another and (b) it looks worth exploring. This topic might also help with tracker items such as 'artf6267 : Disorder of puerperium'. GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Sep 18 16:53:23 Z 2015	post11482	topc7634

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 8th August 2012 21:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc4910)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 8th August 2012 21:00 UTC	Dear all Apologies for the delay in posting this announcement. This call should concentrate on the 'X with Y' topic, but I suspect that we will need to discuss the allergy topic further during the call. In addition I have posted a few files in a zip at [doc6206]. I've basically been experimenting with what happens if we actually do try to: (a) eliminate the disorder/finding distinction (b) introduce top-level SDP classes (augmented with a 'clinical observation' class in an attempt to handle the 'findings' - easier to explain on the call). The sample/seed set used to generate the owl module is based on the concept members of the "D+E\|D+F\|F+E" tab of the Disord_Manifest_Causation_Jan09.xls spreadsheet, which is made up of an earlier attempt to identify the polysemic finding/disorder/event terms in SCT (arguably the sorts of things we were trying to address with the original event/condition project in the first place!) Call-in details: IHTSDO Line: 2 (Dial in numbers at [doc4950]) Passcode: 54362# GoToMeeting Meeting ID: 746-085-848 https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/746085848 Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Aug 08 15:50:30 Z 2012	post7155	topc4910
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 8th August 2012 21:00 UTC	Dear all Many thanks for those who were able to attend this call. Present on call: Bruce Goldberg Rob Hausam Ed Cheetham Topics discussed: (1) Main topic of discussion was the allergy proposal which Bruce is now working through to Construction Phase with IHTSDO and Support Organisation staff. Main points debated: (a) Allergic sensitization class (and its relationship to allergy disposition). Eventual agreement that this class is (by design) ambiguous - both serving as the antecedent process of 'becoming sensitized' and the subsequent state (which might be structural, dispositional or processual) of 'being sensitised'. Represented therefore as a direct descendant of 'allergic condition' (to emphasise its 'condition' nature) and its relationship to Allergy changed to Allergy:After=Allergic sensitisation. This is perhaps a bit mischevious, but the implication is that Allergy (disposition) follows both the transition to sensitisation and any ensuing peroid of the sensitised state. (b) Allergic 'condition' class - risk that careless introduction of this class may actually complicate matters. Notably it may be interpreted (on face value) as yet another way of saying 'allergy disposition'. Value in its retention agreed (as useful common ancestor of the allergy/allergic reaction/allergic disorder family of concepts); mitigation through guidance documentation and provision of text definition. (c) Allergy disposition. Some discussion regarding renaming. Not sure that the world is really ready for 'allergy disposition' as a preferred term - suggestion (as for (b)) that the use of text definitions may help clarify the meaning and intended use of this class. (2) Other topics - briefly discussed but essentially deferred: (a) Ed's posting of sample data with early attempt to remove 'finding/disorder' distinction. May be useful to clarify likely design options - in particular scaling up the abstract designs in Stefan's paper to the concrete reality of thousands of concepts. (b) Bruce presented an outline approach to representing combined disorders where either a 'manifestation dominant' or 'causal dominant' approach (see [post6919]) appeared problematic. Using the example of 'intestinal obstruction with hernia' (or 'hernia with intestinal obstruction', or 'obstructed intestinal hernia'): Current modelling favours a 'causal' emphasis (they are therefore classified as kinds of hernia, but not kinds of intestinal obstruction). Bruce's proposal was to represent these with multiple (in this case two) definitions which would allow them to be both causal and manifestational (one to satisfy a prevailing modelling preference and the other to satisfy the alternative perspective and - on occasions - the instinctive modelling preference). Such an approach would be achieved by creating complementary definitions of the form: RG1{'intestinal obstruction' and after/due_to=hernia} RG2{'hernia' and has_result (or equivalent)=intestinal obstruction} In each case the early part of the definition would be the 'condition' definition (role grouped finding site & morph abnormality) and the second part would be the 'disorder' itself. Ed wondered whether this was comparable to the notion of 'multiple sufficient and necessary definitions' - which has certainly been discussed in the past but not (I think) implemented in any scalable SNOMED CT setting. Next call: September 5th at 20:00-22:00 hours. Details to follow. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon Aug 13 14:00:22 Z 2012	post7162	topc4910
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 8th August 2012 21:00 UTC	Thanks to Bruce for a clarification to these notes: "...Regarding "Allergy disposition. Some discussion regarding renaming. Not sure that the world is really ready for 'allergy disposition' as a preferred term - suggestion (as for (b)) that the use of text definitions may help clarify the meaning and intended use of this class." I think my intention was to retain "allergy" as the preferrned name but change the FSN from allergic state to allergic disposition which I think is no more confusing than the current FSN (in addition to adding clarifying text definitions)..." Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Aug 17 12:26:25 Z 2012	post7174	topc4910

IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday July 10th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours [to follow content committee] (collabnet topic id: topc5966)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday July 10th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours [to follow content committee]	We have an ECE project call on Wednesday July 10th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours Agenda: 1. Review minutes of last call [post8696] 2. Plan format and content of October 2013 WGM GoToMeeting details: Meeting ID: 482-504-800 https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/482504800 As before, I will set this call up for us to use the GoToMeeting VoIP. However, just, in case, I have also arranged for an IHTSDO conference line. Conference call [dial-in details at [doc7837]): Line: Line no 2 Passcode: 54362# Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Jul 09 13:21:28 Z 2013	post8697	topc5966
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday July 10th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours [to follow content committee]	Notes from call: Present on call: Ed Cheetham Bruce Goldberg Rob Hausam Paul Amos Most of the call was spent discussing and planning the agenda for the Washington face-to-face meeting. The resulting draft agenda looks like (with a few supporting notes): Allergy topic [half day] Preliminaries/preparations: - materials for presentations below - interim and aspirational models - re-document use cases / safety considerations 1. Allergy, pseduoallergy, allergic reaction, allergic sensitisation. Discussion and agreement on final details of the allergy/pseudoallergy and allergic reaction interim model (using current SNOMED CT model components), including: i. explanation/illustration of effect on existing content ii. presentation of top-level classes and their definitions iii. Confirm approach to combination products iv. Confirm approach to the small number of substances which can both provoke allergy and pseudoallergy 2. Presentation and discussion of aspirational model [requiring novel model and DL features]. 3. Comparison of material in 1 & 2 with know use cases / usage safety considerations. 4. Progress report on resolution approach to "plant/pollen allergen" issue. X with Y [half day] Preliminaries/preparations: - Revise, update and circulate latest version of "Patterns document". - Ideally conduct 2 cycles of 4 reviewers of 'unofficial' X with Y testing. - Produce/outline 'official' test plan. Agenda topics 1. presentation of X with Y document (including causative agent/after patterns) and proposed usage process. Partly informative for meeting attendees, partly to allow discussion/modification. 2. Report back on the 'unoffical' X with Y testing and describe official test plan methodology. Partly informative, partly to sanity check official testing process. 3. Present 'official' test plan (developed with consideration of work done in observables project). Consider moving to 'testing construction' including, planning for content revision to align with proposal (resourcing, quality measures, impact assessment etc). Potentially applicable to: --specific content area [Paul's diabetes work] --wider testing [general X with Y issues] Actions - Pre-14th August meeting: Ed - Extend patterns document to include 'causative agent' pattern and introduce putative 'process' section Ed - read and rework obs testing plan for X with Y Bruce - Extend patterns document to include 'after' pattern Ed - outline timetable for testing. All - undertake testing of 4th test set [doc8565: XwithYSyndrome20130710.xlsx] prior to next meeting 14th August ideally according to above timetable. Subsequent actions Bruce - dust off aspirational allergy etc. model and discuss with Stefan Paul - produce fast track project document for pollen allergen issue. Bruce - consider impact of removing residual due to=allergic reaction / has definitional manifestation Bruce - consider options for pseudoallergy / substances which can both provoke allergy and pseudoallergy. Next call: 14th August 2013 21:00 UTC Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Thu Jul 18 15:56:09 Z 2013	post8725	topc5966

IHTSDO ECE PG: Call Wednesday July 23rd 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours (collabnet topic id: topc6951)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Call Wednesday July 23rd 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Dear all I somehow forgot to send out the invitation for a call on 23rd July (so here it is): Main topic to discuss: Review of homework on complex X with Y content based on Bruce's posting at [post10286]. GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Jul 23 13:28:31 Z 2014	post10326	topc6951
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Call Wednesday July 23rd 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	...and mine and Bruce's homework can be found at [doc10760]. Ed	edcheetham	Wed Jul 23 14:19:40 Z 2014	post10327	topc6951
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Call Wednesday July 23rd 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Please find the attached spreadsheet of my homework. I added an additional column for definition. The brackets indicate that concept is better to be represented by binary relationships. There are two extra examples from CMT content. Hopefully, we will have time to discuss. Cheers	ygao	Wed Jul 23 16:03:15 Z 2014	post10329	topc6951
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Call Wednesday July 23rd 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Brilliant - thanks Yong. Ed	edcheetham	Wed Jul 23 16:31:03 Z 2014	post10330	topc6951
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Call Wednesday July 23rd 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Significant technical problems at the moment - give it a couple more minutes. Ed	edcheetham	Wed Jul 23 21:05:23 Z 2014	post10332	topc6951
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Call Wednesday July 23rd 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Brief notes from the call: Present on call: Ed Cheetham Bruce Goldberg Yongsheng Gao Apologies: Paul Amos Stefan Schulz (1) Apologies for the delay in setting up the call - technical issues (2) Main topic discussed were our three 'complex combination review' spreadsheets. Points of particular note were around the value of extending the review/components (to include a 'definition' column' to assist modelling, and then two 'modified FSN' columns - one to represent the 'approach 1' FSN reworking, and one to represent a reworking of the 'definition'. We speculated as to whether there was any systematic relationship between the results of the matrix comparison of conditions and the components of each definition (as suggested in Yong's paper). In particular, there may be a case for any pattern 3 pairings (due to and co-occurrent) justifying the creation of a simple 'X due to Y' concept. (3) incidentally, Stefan has shared an owl model for the "contusion" example we discussed in May [doc10765], and hopefully we will get a chance to discuss/explore this on a future call. Next call planned for 21:00 UTC August 13th, further homework (with new columns - provided by Bruce) at [post10333]. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Thu Jul 24 11:09:09 Z 2014	post10336	topc6951

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 21st September 2011 - 20:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc3742)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 21st September 2011 - 20:00 UTC	We have a project call on Wednesday 21st September 2011 - 20:00-22:00 UTC Draft agenda: (1) brief recap of 7th September call (2) MAIN TOPIC continue discussion & elaboration of use cases - comparison document posted [doc4432] - evaluation against features of proposed model. (3) planning for Sydney face-to-face meeting. Call Instructions: Usual IHTSDO call instructions [doc3360] Line #2 Passcode 54362# GoToMeeting: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/282737160 Meeting ID: 282-737-160 Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Sep 20 14:07:25 Z 2011	post5326	topc3742
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 21st September 2011 - 20:00 UTC	Brief notes from the call (many thanks to those who attended): Present on call: Kent Spackman Bruce Goldberg Stefan Schulz Ed Cheetham Apologies: Rob Hausam Topics discussed: (1) Stefan reported back on the metonymy issue. Hope is to gather a few more examples and estimated frequency metrics before raising the topic significantly. Suspicion is that logical/KR and linguistic perspectives will be complementary. Notably, for examples such as 'gastritis' (which in terms of clinical linguistics/idiom are effectively unavoidable) there are known and potential strategies (GCI axioms, distinguishing locations from participants) which would allow the practice to continue whilst preserving intended precision in the reference data. (2) Bruce shared a Visio rendering of the most recent allergy model. This was tested against each of the currrent allergy 'use cases', resulting in identified classes/subgraph components relevant to each, as well as a bit of clean-up. output of the exercise posted as the following files: doc4538: Revised upperlevel allergy class file - use case comparison 20110922.pptx A set of powerpoint slides showing the original, reworked and use-case-specified model diagrams. final slide shows known outstanding topics - mainly indicating un-discussed model components, and specifically highlighting the need to indicate how the 'allergic condition' common supertype will be used to model the 'deliberately uncommitted/ambigous' concepts this project is trying to address [special plea from Ed to regard the potentially ambiguous 'allergy to X' concepts as committed 'dispositions']. doc4537: Revised upperlevel allergy class files 20110921.zip Archive of the visio files themselves. (3) Planning for Sydney face-to-face... Draft agenda will mostly involve Bruce (! - sorry); (i) Presentation and 'acceptance testing' of allergy model with WG audience (in particular considering (a) implications for existing content - how much 'new stuff' will be needed to complete the intended definitions and (b) whether there are intermediate features of the proposal which could be implemented sooner) (ii) Presentation and 'acceptance testing' of artf6166: X with Y, X due to Y inception document materials (allowing opportunity for consideration of solution options). (4) Ed to arrange another call for Wednesday 28th September to allow further refinement of this meeting's materials ahead of Sydney. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Thu Sep 22 13:55:57 Z 2011	post5339	topc3742

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call 20th April 2015 2000 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc7467)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call 20th April 2015 2000 UTC	Dear all Based on feedback from regular call participants, we are going to try and have a call next Monday! I also think we should take the opportunity to move forward by 1 hour now DST is in effect, so the details will be: Wednesday - April 20th at 20:00 UTC. We need to continue to explore how to extend the allergy model to other disorders (rough outputs from February in the slide deck at [doc11966]). GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Thu Apr 16 14:25:08 Z 2015	post11145	topc7467
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call 20th April 2015 2000 UTC	Dear all - this time with MONDAY consistently used (thanks Rob!) Based on feedback from regular call participants, we are going to try and have a call next MONDAY! I also think we should take the opportunity to move forward by 1 hour now DST is in effect, so the details will be: MONDAY - April 20th at 20:00 UTC. We need to continue to explore how to extend the allergy model to other disorders (rough outputs from February in the slide deck at [doc11966]). GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Apr 17 05:42:21 Z 2015	post11148	topc7467
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call 20th April 2015 2000 UTC	Notes from call Present on call: Rob Hausam Bruce Goldberg Paul Amos Yongsheng Gao Ed Cheetham Topics discussed: The group continues to consider how to apply 'the allergy approach' to other disease areas. As expected this is slow-going. We concentrated on the 'identify SDP ancestor' and 'identify relevant classes' topics, considering examples of asthma and diabetes mellitus [see slides at doc12394 for the physical output - doesn't really reflect the time spent talking!]. Points of note included: (1) if we are to avoid an unwelcome proliferation of 'condition/SDP' classes, we will need to identify criteria for their introduction. The allergy approach introduces these fairly fractally - the idea largely being that they support a valuable retrieval function (to support search for reactions/processes and dispositions), but such a requirement may not exist for all conditions. Likewise, there will be conditions that are not accompanied by process/structure classes (does chronic renal failure have accompanying 'attacks'?) (2) The advantage of an existing class becoming its own SDP is that it simplifies the number of classes in the reference data, however this is accompanied by adding complexity to instance creation (e.g. adding 'IsA disposition' at the time of record creation), and risks creating confusion with the introduction of unexpected process subtypes. (3) In the case of diabetes mellitus, there are very distinct process/structure companions - short & long term "glucose metabolism abnormalities" and longer term consequences of abnormal microvascular formation. ICD11 appears to distinguish these, and the distinction also fits with our previous treatment of various diabetic complications as pattern 2 (e.g. retinopathy) and pattern 3 (ketoacidotic coma). (4) Passing comment at the end of the meeting that a class cannot be both a disposition and a process - in the case of combination concepts this is not illegal - but could make 'ontoclean'-type QA a bit harder. Next call planned for 4th May at 20:00 UTC - more of the same. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Thu Apr 30 13:04:06 Z 2015	post11180	topc7467

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Call Wednesday 15th October 21:00 UTC for 1 hour (collabnet topic id: topc7233)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Call Wednesday 15th October 21:00 UTC for 1 hour	Dear all Following on from last month's call (and our brief period of respite), we agreed that we would have a short 'checkpoint' call to assist in preparation for the Amsterdam meetings (27th & 28th October). I have posted a draft agenda for the Amsterdam meetings here: https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/doc11164 This will be the main focus of discussion, allowing us to see how much preparatory work is needed for the meetings to run smoothly. GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Oct 08 16:31:28 Z 2014	post10691	topc7233

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday July 11th 21:00 UTC [note time - 1 hour later than usual] (collabnet topic id: topc4800)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday July 11th 21:00 UTC [note time - 1 hour later than usual]	Dear all It's time we had another "X with Y" call. The minutes of the last "X with Y" call are at [post6898]. I did have "some thoughts on syndromes and compound conditions" [post6919] and I would welcome the opportunity to air these ideas. In addition it would be good if we could find time to discuss the 'interim' allergy proposal (maybe 20 mins) just to agree a couple of details. Call details are: GoToMeeting https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/701045873 Meeting ID: 701-045-873 Call: IHTSDO Line: 3 (Dial in numbers at [doc4950]) Passcode: 54362# Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Jul 11 14:56:43 Z 2012	post6995	topc4800
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday July 11th 21:00 UTC [note time - 1 hour later than usual]	Notes from call: Present on call: Rob Hausam Bruce Goldberg Stefan Schulz Ed Cheetham Main topic discussed related to the options available for representing X with Y constructs. As ever various perspectives on 'multiple is_a' vs. limited is_a and associative relations were discussed. General recognition that generalisable rules (interpreting the words of existing terms) will risk the re-interpretation of existing content, but an acceptance that perhaps this is a necessary price for consistency of existing and new content. Possible ?4-pronged approach to analysing existing content (see later for named 'syndromes'): (1) characterisation of each X Y or Z component as Condition or specific subtype (2) consideration of the specific clinical nature of each component (does Y frequently cause X, if so then perhaps regard the intention of the combined concept as causal, even if the 'connecting words' don't say so) (3) consideration of the inevitable temporal overlap between components (to assist in deciding the degree of 'automatic entailment' that can/should be inferred) (4) re-analysis of 'connector' terms which may be relevant [over-and-above those in Bruce's inception paper]. **For info I've had an early go at this in [doc6086] where I have pointed nltk tools (http://nltk.org/) at all the preferred terms and synonyms for finding and event concepts. Intention is to dust off the earlier concept sample (and perhaps rebuild an owl module) and design a reproducibility testing process involving features 1 to 3. Still a need to firm up the allergy approach, so Ed and Bruce to meet tomorrow before Bruce's appointment with Kent. Next call - allergy topic July 25th 2012 (20:00 UTC) Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Thu Jul 12 12:25:03 Z 2012	post7001	topc4800

IHTSDO ECE PG: Initial posting on TeamForge - some thoughts in advance of call 16th February. (collabnet topic id: topc2789)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Initial posting on TeamForge - some thoughts in advance of call 16th February.	Hi all In the attached I've jotted down a few ideas in anticipation of the upcoming ECE call on 16th February. There are basically three areas that I’ve strayed into, roughly corresponding to: Accessory/ectopic/transplanted structures Disposition/condition episode/manifestation relationships Compound concepts I concede that the section on "compound concepts" looks like a backward step (in particular when compared with the superbly argued pleas and thoughts of Penny and Bruce - in slide sets which I hope I can link to once I've posted this!) however I’m beginning to believe that we will never be able to apply rules retrospectively (to existing) and get the behaviour that's needed. So, either we need to inactivate any prior content that doesn’t yield to rigorous scrutiny, or we should consider a more 'statistical' approach to previous "compound content" [essentially leaving it active and providing tools and guidance to allow use and analyse in the light of known uncertainties]. Then, for prospective content (a) nail down the intended meaning of new requests, apply the lexical and formal conventions that Penny and Bruce describe, and (b) analyse these concepts with more stringent/precise reasoning. Comments welcome. Ed	edcheetham	Fri Feb 04 13:53:58 Z 2011	post3681	topc2789
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Initial posting on TeamForge - some thoughts in advance of call 16th February.	Greetings Ed. "In some ways it suggests treating SNOMED CT’s disorder concepts as ‘situations/syndromes’, where • out-going IsA relationships say “includes -> now”, • Due_to relationships say “due to + includes-> now or past” • After relationships say “after + includes-> now or past” • Associated_with relationships say “possibly includes” I am having a little difficulty in digesting this. Could you provide some example concepts and how you would model? Thanks much.	bgoldberg	Mon Feb 07 04:33:00 Z 2011	post3684	topc2789
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Initial posting on TeamForge - some thoughts in advance of call 16th February.	Thanks Bruce I think this is basically (for the existing troublesome combined content) a proposal based on despair that we will not be able to dissect/interpret prior content predictably and usefully. Consider these examples: 190279008 \| Iodine hypothyroidism (disorder) Isa = Hypothyroidism (disorder) [grandparent] Isa = Iodine deficiency (disorder) [grandparent] 87522002 \| Iron deficiency anemia (disorder) Isa = lots of anemia concepts Due_to = Iron deficiency (disorder) We have a number of choices with what to do here. (1) We could conclude that the 'iodine' example is wrong and remodel it (to be more like the iron one). (2) We could inactivate one or other (probably the iodine one) as being ambiguous, and represent the uncertainty via >1 May_be_a relationships (3) We could accept the messiness of thousands of syndrome/compositional concepts and allow their persistence in the active data on the understanding that their retrieval requires an active version of 'may_be_a' reasoning over the isa, due_to, after and associated_with relationships. So, in response to your 'how would you model' question, I would answer: For existing content: (a) I would propose spending a finite time collating and identifying likely troublesome content (you, Penny and others have already identified many frequent in-scope English-language patterns). (b) I would produce a refset of these concepts (c) I would produce retrieval and analysis guidance that allowed analysts/query writers to reason over the active data whilst anticipating what seems to be unavoidable uncertainty. Currently, I would argue, we may be under-counting the prevalence of 'iron deficiency' by not subsuming 'iron-deficiency anemia'. For new content: (d) I would apply the more stringent FSN constructions (and maybe text definitions too) that Penny has discussed, making absolutely certain what was to be inferred from records containing such inferences. (e) I would produce another refset that enumerated the 'strict inference' compositional concepts, and therefore limited their interpretation. My suggestion is, therefore, that we treat the existing 'X and Y and Z' concepts like their (more complicated) 'syndrome' counterparts. I see this as an interim solution, allowing new content to be added with more stringent precision. This may not be the final word on existing content, but would create a certain stability even if modelling was later changed. If, for example, it was agreed that the 'X in Y' pattern was never to be regarded as implying the presence of Y (compare 'Hepatitis in late syphilis' with 'Arthropathy in ulcerative colitis') then the combination of the refset in (b) and guidance in (c) would allow a more graceful transition between approaches. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon Feb 07 13:39:32 Z 2011	post3686	topc2789

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call 18th February 2015 21:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc7390)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call 18th February 2015 21:00 UTC	Dear all Our next call is on 18th February @ 21:00 UTC. Topics to be discussed can be found in the posting at [post10886] and following up on progress from the last call [post10983]. GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Thu Feb 12 14:49:38 Z 2015	post10984	topc7390
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call 18th February 2015 21:00 UTC	Notes from call 2015-02-18 Present on call Ed Cheetham Yongsheng Gao Bruce Goldberg Apologies Stefan Schulz Paul Amos Main topics discussed: (1) further discussion on Allen’s intervals. Very useful exploration of (a) distinguishing after from due to (strictly no overlap in the former) and (b) the value of separating out causation from the various temporal correlations. In addition we further discussed the value of introducing ‘due to and after’ as a distinct role. My notes from this are mainly in the slide deck at [doc11965]. Points to note are: - The potential clarity in separating causation from temporal correlation - The possible problems with the instinctive way of incorporating ‘due to and after’ in a role hierarch - The revealing of a correlation class (‘B neither After nor Co-occurrent with A’) which is mathematically distinct but of questionable clinical value on its own, but is necessary for a distinct definition of ‘due to’. (2) Early exploration of how to extend the allergy model to other disorders. This was very rough work, with the outputs in the slide deck at [doc11966]. I’ve kept them to help us get going on the next call, but the results are far from spectacular. Steps we considered working through are: a. Identify relevant classes - that set of classes which form the SDP variants of an X condition (should raised blood pressure be the ‘sibling’ of ‘systemic hypertensive disposition’?) b. Identify SDP ancestor – including ‘is the concept its own SDP ancestor (is the existing ‘gastro-esophageal reflux disease’ its own SDP disjunction, or is it just the disposition?) c. Develop formal definition – how will each class be defined. Mainstream SNOMED CT modelling, except for... d. Accommodate ancestry – what differences are needed/expected in ancestry to make other content behave like the allergy data? Does each concept need its own equivalent of ‘hypersensitivity disposition’, how do we formally distinguish each ‘disposition’ and pathologic process/structure by means other than just the name. (3) Additional discussion on change request examples: (a) view that ‘X resulting from poorly controlled diabetes mellitus’ would not helpfully be regarded as a distinct condition (as compared with ‘X resulting from diabetes mellitus’) – adequacy of control really ought to be regarded as a complementary recording exercise, where adequacy of treatment, compliance or disease progression are all factors (nevertheless acceptance that this will be a difficult request discussion given many prior disease distinctions). (b) Gait disorder due to weakness (disorder). Despite a general view that there is little value fretting over finding/disorder distinctions, it seemed sensible to change the tag on this one back to ‘finding’. Next steps – need to work with Stefan to see if we can get a paper to ICBO for submission deadline. Next call planned for Wednesday 4th March 2015 21:00 UTC (US clocks change March 8th, Europe March 29th, Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Sat Feb 21 11:17:38 Z 2015	post11001	topc7390
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call 18th February 2015 21:00 UTC [regarding next call...]	Dear all Just a quick note to say sorry - tomorrow's planned call (4th March 2015 21:00 UTC) will not be taking place [my fault]. Provisionally we shall reschedule for 18th March. More details to follow nearer the time. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Mar 03 20:22:37 Z 2015	post11027	topc7390
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call 18th February 2015 21:00 UTC [regarding next call...]	Dear all Given a number of competing requirements this week I regret that I will be postponing the ECE call again (tentatively arranged for 18th March). Please accept my apologies. The next call will therefore be on April 1st. I think most participants' countries will be on daylight saving time by then so I am minded to change the start time to 20:00 UTC, but I shall have to see whether the nearby calls (modellers, family of languages, ? others) are also changing to ensure I don't produce a clash. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon Mar 16 12:01:08 Z 2015	post11063	topc7390

IHTSDO ECE PG: Agenda for ECE project group meeting in Sydney (collabnet topic id: topc3779)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Agenda for ECE project group meeting in Sydney	Here is the (hopefully) final agenda	bgoldberg	Sun Oct 02 21:51:32 Z 2011	post5385	topc3779
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Agenda for ECE project group meeting in Sydney	Thanks Bruce - this looks fine. Ed	edcheetham	Tue Oct 04 11:35:37 Z 2011	post5408	topc3779

IHTSDO ECE PG: Next ECE call date (collabnet topic id: topc5881)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Next ECE call date	Dear Bruce/All Strictly according to our 2 week routine we should have an ECE call this wednesday (as mentioned in the last minutes). For a number of reasons (upcoming leave, other personal commitments) I wonder if it would be possible to delay it for a week, and also have another three week interval until the next one. This would mean the next calls would be: 22nd May 20:30 UTC for 2 hours 12th May 21:00 UTC (after Content committee) for 90 mins Then, depending on availability we could agree on how frequently we wish to meet - we would be getting into the summer vacation period so I'm not assuming we would automatically go back to 2 weekly. The additional 'benefit' of not meeting this week would be to allow uninterrupted attendance at the 20:00 UTC Terminology Editors meeting (after last week's was postponed). Hope this is acceptable - interested to hear your views. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon May 13 09:34:42 Z 2013	post8536	topc5881
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Next ECE call date	Dear all I've had a note back from Bruce indicating that this propsal is acceptable to him. I can therefore confirm that the next project calls will be scheduled for: 22nd May 20:30 UTC for 2 hours 12th June 21:00 UTC (after Content committee) for 90 mins Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue May 14 09:55:52 Z 2013	post8546	topc5881

IHTSDO ECE PG: Project call 29th February 2012 21:00-23:00 UTC. (collabnet topic id: topc4335)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Project call 29th February 2012 21:00-23:00 UTC.	Dear all The next ECE call is scheduled for 29th February 2012 21:00-23:00 UTC. Call: IHTSDO Line: 3 (Dial in numbers at [doc4950]) Passcode: 54362# GoToMeeting: Meeting ID: 691-123-897 https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/691123897 'Agenda'... This call will concentrate on the issue of 'combined concepts', continuing with our proposal to alternate between 'allergy' and 'combined concepts' per call. Bruce's draft inception document ('X with Y, X due to Y' is at [topc4223]. The main action from last call was to "...try and collate the documenation and analysis use cases which are understood to be supported by representing combined concepts...", against a background intention to address the subtopics in the following order: - Clarifying the nature of concepts in SNOMED CT (situations, realist class representations) - Making sense of the complexities of relevant clinical language, e.g. using single phrases to: - refer to multiple/compound observations, activities and events - convey subtle blends of uncertainty, negation and causation between them - do so in a parsimonious way - Organising (e.g. hierarchically) the various types of causation and temporal association. It would be good if we could approach the call with this in mind. In addition we should: (1) review minutes of last call (allergy topic) [post6239] (2) review stefan's Fallot owl file posting [post6119] (3) review stefan's posting of the draft document "Ontology-based convergence of medical terminologies: SNOMED CT and ICD 11" [doc5346], in particular for the definitions of situation/condition. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Feb 28 15:17:21 Z 2012	post6297	topc4335
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Project call 29th February 2012 21:00-23:00 UTC.	Notes from ECE call 2012-02-29 Present on call: Bruce Goldberg Rob Hausam Ed Cheetham Topics discussed: 1. Review of minutes from 15th February. Bruce pointed out that the use case example was wrong - reads 'allergic urticarial reaction' and should read 'allergic urticaria'. 2. Following on from identification of 'disordered structure or process' class, discussion regarding a plausible mechanism for disambiguation of descendants of such concepts in-use [see action below]. 3. X with Y discussion: Main discussion concentrated on the identification of relevant use case short names. Mostly found in Bruce's inception paper and associated works. The first draft list can be summarised as [with any assocated notes in square brackets]: a. Documentation of combined disorders & observations, where associated by time, causation & predisposition. b. Documentation of combined clinical phenomena (disorders and interventions), where associated by time, causation & predisposition. [complications / sequelae] c. Mapping parallel conjunctive and negated pairs from ICD-10 to SNOMED CT "...in as few clicks as possible.." [in retrospect not sure if this should read 'from SNOMED CT to ICD-10'] d. Querying for all references to disease x including subtypes of disease x and associations (including manifestations) with disease x e. Documenting syndromes (and syndrome variants) [relevant to Stefan et al's work on role grouping as 'includes', but hard to see how named clinical notions defined in terms of 'three from five' possible features]. This list is also available in the powerpoint slides at doc5469, to allow addition of examples, specific requirements and expansion into design options. Actions: 1. preparation for next calls: a. Allergy call... Hopefully discussion will concentrate on describing a plausible & practical mechanism for disambiguation of descendants of SDP disjunction concepts. b. X with Y call... Build up (within the body of each slide at doc5469) a set of illustrative examples for each use case short name. 2. Organise next calls - dates: March 14th 21:00 UTC March 28th 2012 20:00 UTC Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Mar 09 16:36:59 Z 2012	post6347	topc4335

IHTSDO ECE PG: Next ECE project call (collabnet topic id: topc3046)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Next ECE project call	Dear all I'm afraid I've been a bit distracted recently and haven't organised the next ECE call date (still concentrating on the allergy model for now). Looking at the calendar (and sticking with Wednesdays at 20:00 UTC) how are the regulars fixed for either: Wednesday June 15th Wednesday June 22nd? At the moment I can't see a clash with content committee or observables! Thanks in advance and sorry about the delay in sending this out. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri May 20 15:43:35 Z 2011	post4300	topc3046
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Next ECE project call	Hi all Based on current feedback, I suggest that we go for 22nd June 20:00 UTC for the next ECE call. This should also allow us time to review and discuss Bruce's recent postings of the current allergy model [post4335] and accompanying first cut owl file [post4334]. Phone and GoToMeeting details to follow. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Thu May 26 07:05:04 Z 2011	post4341	topc3046

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday December 18th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours (collabnet topic id: topc6333)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday December 18th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	As planned, we have an ECE project call for 18th December 2013. Topics to discuss include: - Continued review of last round of X with Y testing work [doc9475] & [doc9476]. - Planning timetable for January-March 2014 GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Dec 18 09:58:09 Z 2013	post9353	topc6333
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday December 18th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Brief notes from call Present on call: Ed Cheetham Bruce Goldberg Yongsheng Gao Stefan Schulz Apologies Paul Amos Topics discussed. Futher review of test materials at [doc9475] & [doc9476]. review concentrated on those where Yong had opted for pattern 1 and Ed/Bruce had selected patterns 2 or 3. Main discussion centred on the Ed/Bruce view/assumption that "intended simple co-ocurrennce" (Pattern 1) is actually very rare in clinical statements, and instead there is almost always some measure of implied causation - hence pattern 2 & 3 preferences. Notable exception - "syndromes". Additional points: (1) Extent of influence of classification definitions on modelling choices. This issue becomes particularly significant for 'and'-containing concepts. if interpreted in the context of their classification origins, these should often be interepreted as 'distributive and' ('or'!) but if interpreted in a classification neutral sense they may be interepreted as simple/logical 'and'. See: Proc AMIA Symp. 1998:790-4. Reproducibility of interpreting "and" and "or" in terminology systems. Mendonça EA, Cimino JJ, Campbell KE, Spackman KA. PMID: 9929327 (2) Suspicion remains that "trying to model the words" is not satisfactory. In particular, the ordering of components in a termstring should not influence "parent identification" (e.g. just because 'Viral hepatitis B with hepatic coma' begins with 'viral hepatitis' this is no absolute reason for the concept to be a subtype of 'viral hepatitis'. Instead we should include an FSN revision step, based on the pattern analysis step, which will include a clearer conjunction (stating causality) which may well reverse the order of referenced conditions. Next call - planned for Wednesday 15th January 2014 21:00 UTC Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Dec 24 14:18:05 Z 2013	post9382	topc6333

IHTSDO ECE PG: Project call 11th January 2012 21:00-23:00 UTC. (collabnet topic id: topc4205)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Project call 11th January 2012 21:00-23:00 UTC.	Dear all Quick reminder regarding the ECE project group call 11th January 2012 21:00-23:00 UTC Details: IHTSDO Line: 3 (Dial in numbers at [doc4950]) Passcode: 54362# GoToMeeting: Meeting ID: 873-420-328 https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/873420328 Topic - allergy representation Draft agenda: (1) review of December minutes (2) review of allergy model (Bruce) - in particular need decision on desirability for phase 1 proposal of direct link between dispositions/disordered structures and causative agents. (3) if time permits - discussion/demonstration of alternative hierarchical displays for situation/"associated with" target concepts (4) AOB Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Jan 10 22:32:42 Z 2012	post6068	topc4205
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Project call 11th January 2012 21:00-23:00 UTC.	Notes from call 2012-01-11 Present on call: Bruce Goldberg Kent Spackman Rob Hausam Stefan Schulz Ed Cheetham Topics discussed (1) Allergy model Concentrated effort to describe an intermediate/bridging model proposal, i.e. an achievable short term step exploiting current DL and concept model features. Proposal most clearly explained graphically, but in textual terms it would consist of: Allergy (disposition) - has_definitional_manifestation - Allergic reaction [to be replaced by 'reversed' isRealizationOf (Some)'] Allergy (disposition) - causative_agent - agent [to be replaced by 'hasAgentOfRealization (Some)'] Allergic reaction - causative agent - agent [to be replaced by 'hasAgent (Some)'] Additonal points (a) to investigate the addition of the hasAgentOfRealization & hasAgent attributes as specialisations of 'causative agent' (b) to investigate the utility of asserting the right identity: isRealizationOf o hasAgentOfRealization -> hasAgent (c) agreement that neither the initial has_definitional_manifestation nor the subsequent isRealizationOf pattern would require a proliferation of agent-specific 'allergic reaction' concepts. If corresponding agent-specific 'allergic reaction' concepts exist then these will be referenced, however for most the general 'allergic reaction' class will be used (specificity of the disposition being achieved with the substance directly referenced by the causative agent [& see right identity note above] (d) to consider the likely usage scope of isRealizationOf. Its introduction will not be as simple as reversing all hasDefinitionalManifestation relationships, since many of these take very non-specific values (e.g. "seizure", which is not always the realization of Epilepsy). (2) Variant hierarchical display/retrieval options To assist in the reasoned consideration of situation-based proposals for addressing "combined concepts", an approach to modifying 'hierarchical' data display was demonstrated by Ed. Various configurable options have been experimented with, notably: - Displaying situations as subtypes of their targets of associated_finding and associated_procedure relationships. Refinement included to test against 'soft default' situation modelling (to avoid negation etc.) - most vivid examples are the limited number of situation concepts carrying multiple role groups, such as: 440706004 \| Full renal function recovered (situation) 371622005 \| Elevated blood pressure reading without diagnosis of hypertension (situation) Here it is possible to tailor whether situation concepts should be shown as 'subtypes' of each of their multiple associated findings (depending on other context values). - Displaying targets of '<<associated with', 'has focus' and 'has definitional manifestation' relationships. Of less obvious navigational/retrieval utility, but can be of value for quality assuring content into consistent patterns (forcing 'similar' content into one place, and indicating differences in modelling). Note - both of the above approaches can (trivially) be achieved using the Configuration: View\taxonomy\Parent relationships feature, and adding supplementary relationship types alongside IsA. Next call - January 25th 21:00 UTC - emphasis on 'combined concept' aspect of project. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Jan 20 13:02:50 Z 2012	post6091	topc4205

IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday July 9th 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours (collabnet topic id: topc6913)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday July 9th 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Dear all We have a project call this week. The main topic for discussion will be a return visit to complex X with Y problems. Bruce has previously posted some examples of these at [post9891], and I intend to use this spreadsheet to guide discussion. GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon Jul 07 15:42:29 Z 2014	post10274	topc6913
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday July 9th 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Brief notes from call 9th July 2014 Present on call Ed Cheetham Rob Hausam Bruce Goldberg Paul Amos Yongsheng Gao Main topic of discussion was an attempt to mature/improve the complex compositional concept approach. Examples worked on were: INTRACEREBRAL HEMORRHAGE DUE TO TRAUMA WO COMA AND BRAIN COMPRESSION. Double aortic arch with left arch dominant and coarctation of right arch Chronic drug induced gout of left ankle with tophi To which we applied the 'dual approach' - loosely outlined in [post10091]. The first (INTRACEREBRAL HEMORRHAGE...) was complicated by the WO exclusion (what was its scope, and how do we do exclusions anyway?). The second one ('Double aortic...') probably turned out to be a simple pattern 1. The third (gout & tophi) provoked some interesting discussion about the nature of tophi, and also highlighted 'gout' as another good example of a condition where the same name is used for the active episodes ('look at that gout') and the disposition ('this patient suffers from gout'). In addition it raised discussion about the need (or not) to introduce metabolic upset as a necessary part of the concept's definition - here we wondered whether hyperuricaemia is an inevitable feature of 'gout' (disposition), or only a feature of a flare up. The third also helpfully revealed a problem with the 'approach 1' term reordering. By forcing the 'tophi' to the beginning of the term (to allow the explicit use of due_to in the regular form of the term), we lost sight of the 'chronic drug induced gout' component as being a necessary part of the 'situation' (falsely characterising it as a pattern 2 (situation='tophi due_to Chronic drug induced gout' - which might resolve before the resolution of the tophi). Our conclusion was that part of the pattern 1 approach should be to make an initial judgement about each component of the term - as to whether it should be retained as a necessary part of the 'situation' being defined. Next call: Wednesday July 23rd 21:00 UTC Homework - attempt to dissect/define a small number of test concepts - kindly posted by Bruce at [post10286] ('Five more complex (>2) combined disorders'), using a combination of the processes outlined in [post10091] and any other good ideas you may have! Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Jul 18 14:54:21 Z 2014	post10306	topc6913

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call MONDAY 4th May 2015 2000 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc7484)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call MONDAY 4th May 2015 2000 UTC	Dear all We have another call planned for MONDAY 4th May 2015 20:00 UTC. As before I hope we can continue to explore how to extend the allergy model to other disorders (updated working slides at [doc12394]). GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Thu Apr 30 13:08:07 Z 2015	post11181	topc7484
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call MONDAY 4th May 2015 2000 UTC	Notes from call 2015-05-04 Present on call: Bruce Goldberg Rob Hausam Yongsheng Gao Ed Cheetham Apologies: Paul Amos Topics discussed: Much of the call concentrated on the prior 'application of allergy' work - in particular using the previous examples of asthma and DM. Particular attention was given to various perspectives of the questions: Do we always need a 'condition' (S/D/P) class? If we already appear to have a 'condition' (S/D/P) class, [when] should distinct S, D or P subclasses be introduced? A fairly circular discussion followed, attempting to reconcile the trade-offs between the merits/risks of (a) adding a 'condition' class where one or more related S, D or P classes already exist and (b) adding explicit S/D/P specialisations where condition classes are identified: (a) adding a 'condition' class: The main benefit considered on the call related to analysis and retrieval - in particular noting the value of easily retrieving content where clinically it is useful to consider, for example, processes and dispositions to be indicators of the same phenomenon. For example, a record entry indicating allergic disposition to X (D) and a record entry indicating an allergic reaction to X (P) are both likely to be of interest when asking the question is 'should I avoid exposing the patient to X?'. (b) adding explicit S/D/P specialisations: The main benefit here would be a simplified (single code) representation of distinct S, D or P classes when required. The alternative (making use of the [necessarily] ambiguous 'condition' classes) requires either that an ambiguous record entry is made, or an additional step is required to commit the condition class to the intended S, D or P meaning. In Stefan's paper [1] this appears to be achieved by the assignment of a specific supertype, but this is not the only way to achieve this. [1] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3102895/ The main drawback of both relates to a proliferation of concepts - which the ideas expressed in [1] attempt to avoid. [1] uses the phrase '...judicious use of disjunctive classes...'; as for our discussion on the call, the criteria for 'judiciousness' are unstated/inconclusive. One possibly useful contribution came out of discussions relating to asthma and epilepsy. In each case we asked ourselves whether the current ancestor codes (195967001 \| Asthma (disorder) and 84757009 \| Epilepsy (disorder)) were SDP, S, D or P classes, and how they related to their most visible process counterparts (asthma attack and epileptic seizure respectively). In both we concluded that the presence of the process implied the presence of the disposition [meaning that asthma attack is strictly 'asthma attack co-occurent and due to asthma' and epileptic seizure is strictly 'epileptic seizure co-occurent and due to epilepsy'. As such the process implies the disposition. We just have to decide whether it is better to have another ancestor for both (asthma/epilepsy condition). My personal instinct is that this would add more problems than it solved, but leaves a requirement that if one really wants to say 'asthma disposition' then the current code for asthma on its own is insufficient. Speculatively it was considered that 'rapid' or 'immediate' processes would imply the disposition, whilst longer term manifestations (in particular structural ones) may only be noted after the disposition has 'passed' (classic example being diabetic metabolic upsets vs. diabetic vascular damage). Other topics discussed: Yong inquired whether the current FSN pattern for P3 concepts is correct. Current wording is 'X co-occurrent and due to Y', which arguably is missing 'with' which is present in 'X co-occurent with Y'. The group agreed that this is a good point to raise, however felt that 'X co-occurrent with and due to' seemed particularly clumsy, containing 'with, and + to'. Yong requested that a terse form of the ECE X with Y approach be developed for inclusion in the Editorial Guide. Ed offered to draft this in time for the next call. Yong directed the group to his current project on Events [artf222723]. Not a lot of time to discuss this on the call, but some consideration given to the distinction between 'Dead' and 'Death'. Some of the group felt that these could be merged. Ed urged caution in this respect - mostly based on a historical concern that the distinction had been deliberately introduced. Since the call I've wondered whether there are valuable distinctions to be made, notably in supporting the definitions of concepts such as 'family history - relative dead' (which would use a 'relative dead (finding) as the target of its associated finding), as distinct from 'family history - sudden death (AF='sudden death (event)' and 'fear of death' (AF=death (event)). I'm not sure whether death/dying can be lumped together - arguably they deal with a different process phase. Next meeting: The next call will be on Monday 18th when we plan to discuss the editorial section on X with Y guidance [to be produced]. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon May 11 15:59:21 Z 2015	post11208	topc7484

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 20th March 2013, 20:00 - 22:00 UTC [note now on DST] (collabnet topic id: topc5798)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 20th March 2013, 20:00 - 22:00 UTC [note now on DST]	Dear all Here are the details of the call for 20th March 20:00 UTC - please note the time - shifted an hour forward in UTC since DST now in effect. Agenda: 1. Consider testing experience of patterns in X with Y proposal document [doc7179] [I have posted mine at doc7985 - don't look at them if you want to do the same set (from post8347) independently! The more the merrier, even if you can only do a few]. 2. Update on "pollen and pollen allergen" proposal 3. Consider allergy to combination products +/- allergy discussion on SHRD project [topc5706 and post8379] GoToMeeting: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/658460520 Meeting ID: 658-460-520 As for last time, I've set this call up for us to use the GoToMeeting VoIP. However, just, in case, I have also arranged for an IHTSDO conference line. Conference call [dial-in details at [doc6192]): IHTSDO Line; #3 Passcode: 54362 Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Apr 02 15:21:09 Z 2013	post8390	topc5798
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 3rd April 2013, 20:00 - 22:00 UTC [note now on DST]	Correction/clarification - this is the call for 3rd April - sorry, wrong title. Ed	edcheetham	Wed Apr 03 20:06:22 Z 2013	post8401	topc5798
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 3rd April 2013, 20:00 - 22:00 UTC [note now on DST]	Notes from call: Present on call: Paul Amos Rob Hausam Bruce Goldberg Ed Cheetham Topics discussed: (1) The main discussion was around a walk-through of the training set examples. Crude analysis suggested low inter-rater consistency, but item-by-item analysis suggested that "where it was consistent, it was very consistent". Main observations so far: Kind of obvious, but need to agree mechanism to clarify meaning of each concept. For example "pulmonary insufficiency" is actually referring to ARDS rather than a simpler physiological/functional defect, which changes the most suitable pattern to chose. Where the causative phenomenon is an injurious event (or other notion defined in terms of an 'attack' or 'spasm' or 'shock' etc.) then the general case will be pattern 2 - causation with no assumption of co-occurrence. (2) Combination allergy concepts: Not really discussed on this call - need to arrange a call with Matt to work through the substance/allergy perspectives. (3) Anaphylaxis disposition: Bruce illustrated that there is a degree of dispersal of available 'anaphylaxis' concepts in SNOMED CT. General agreement that there is value in organising these better (most likely by manual correction rather than any DL-based classification), and that there is not a strong case for representing 'propensity for anaphylaxis' - the concern being that this will create an unattractive optionality with regard to how/where to record the manifestation nature. Timing of future calls: There is a concern that the Wednesday 20/21:00 UTC call time will now routinely collide with the IHTSDO modeller calls. We shall continue for now (pushing it later is likely to be unworkable for Stefan), but we may have to come up with something new if the overlap is problematic. Paul offered to talk with Ian Green to see if the calls are likely to need to take place weekly in the long term. Actions: Next call - continue working through training examples Ed to update pattern document Ed to contact Matt Cordell	edcheetham	Mon Apr 15 12:24:19 Z 2013	post8439	topc5798

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Call Wednesday August 27th 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours (collabnet topic id: topc7046)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Call Wednesday August 27th 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Dear We have an ECE conference call planned for 27th August 21:00 UTC. We shall continue to discuss our complex X with Y homework - posted thus: Bruce [post10413] Yong [post10409] Ed [post10411] It would be good if we could have a bit of a discussion about Jim Case's question to last week's modeler's meeting - thus: "Chronic ulcer with hemorrhage. How should this be modeled? In some cases the morphology "chronic bleeding ulcer" is used, whereas in other cases two role groups are created one, one with "chronic ulcer" and the other with "hemorrhage. An example term is 90257004 - Chronic gastrojejunal ulcer with hemorrhage AND obstruction (disorder). It is unclear whether the bleeding is chronic as well as the ulcer." It relates to an earlier partial discussion we had at [post7772], where I questioned how best to handle other combined morphologies. We may also wish to discuss the content for the upcoming face-to-face (including joint session with mapping and implementation SIGs). GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Aug 26 11:54:43 Z 2014	post10457	topc7046
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Call Wednesday August 27th 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Brief notes from call: Present on call: Bruce Goldberg Ed Cheetham Paul Amos Rob Hausam Main topics covered: Most of the call was spent working through the complex X with Y homework. Certainly appears to be convergence in terms of "process", but still noticeable variation (within limits) in terms of outcome. Specific issues raised: The value in identifying components which are mentioned adjectivally (not all of us treated 'hypertensive' as a distinct condition) The problem of calculi (probably an instance of a more general problem): example: Gallbladder calculus with acute cholecystitis and obstruction (disorder) Division in the group WRT whether calculus is a material entity or a condition in its own right. Probably better to treat as the condition (situation of a patient with calculi, or the disposition to form calculi) since this retains the ability to consider all pattern options, but reasonable to split the dissection/modelling exercise into one where the material entity is used (via causative agent) and one with the condition (via due_to/is_a). Incomplete discussion on how to resolve 'calculi' appearing in the data as conditions, morphologic abnormalities and substances. Next call 10th September 21:00 UTC. Ed	edcheetham	Wed Sep 10 15:03:16 Z 2014	post10555	topc7046

IHTSDO ECE PG: Dial in details for face - to - face meeting Sydney Event, Condition & Episode PG (collabnet topic id: topc3807)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Dial in details for face - to - face meeting Sydney Event, Condition & Episode PG	Call in numbers and instructions attached	bgoldberg	Wed Oct 05 15:41:21 Z 2011	post5424	topc3807

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 1st May 2013, 20:30 - 22:30 UTC [please note time] (collabnet topic id: topc5863)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 1st May 2013, 20:30 - 22:30 UTC [please note time]	Dear all Here are the details of the call for 1st May 2013, 20:30 - 22:30 UTC [Please note time is 30 mins later than usual - this is an experiment to see whether this means most of the ECE participants can also dial into the first half of the terminology editors call]. Hopefully Matt Cordell will be able to join us from the SHRD project, so I have moved this item to the top of the agenda. 1. Consider allergy to combination products +/- allergy discussion on SHRD project [topc5706 and post8379] 2. Further consideration of testing experience of patterns in X with Y proposal document [doc7179] - Documents at doc7985, topc5803, topc5801 & doc8105 (synthesis of three individual ones). 3. Update on "pollen and pollen allergen" proposal GoToMeeting: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/202285945 Meeting ID: 202-285-945 As for the last two times, I've set this call up for us to use the GoToMeeting VoIP. However, just, in case, I have also arranged for an IHTSDO conference line. Conference call [dial-in details at [doc6192]): Line: Line no 4 Passcode: 54362# Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Apr 30 15:40:32 Z 2013	post8499	topc5863
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 1st May 2013, 20:30 - 22:30 UTC [please note time]	Please find attached the slides presented at the ECE meeting, May 1. Feel free to send through any questions or comments. Directly or preferably via the Substance redesign project's discussion board. Thanks. Matt C.	mcordell	Fri May 03 04:15:03 Z 2013	post8509	topc5863
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 1st May 2013, 20:30 - 22:30 UTC [please note time]	Notes from call Present: Matt Cordell Bruce Goldberg Rob Hausam Liam Barnes Ed Cheetham Apologies: Stefan Schulz Main topics discussed. Much of the meeting was given over to discussing the common areas of interest between the SHRD and ECE projects. Specifically these concentrated on the representation of compound and complex substances - in particular in relation to the requirement to support 'allergy to X and Y compound preparation' (e.g. amoxycillin + clavulanate). A number of options were discussed - there did not seem to be a realistic option which would both represent the likely situation ('allergy to X OR Y') but also still behave as required for inference (returned when looking for 'Allergy to X' or 'Allergy to Y'). Matt presented the slides (at [post8509]) which explained the current SHRD thinking. Many of the non-hierachical measures (hasPart, isModificationOf) and their corresponding right identities appear necessary to meet the competing requirements of hierarchical purity and pragmatic retrieval behaviour. Interestingly this has resonance with the ECE 'X with Y' discussions, where the appropriately committed reference representation may avoid hierarchical assertions (A due_to B:Is_A, Due_to B) but may also need to be treated as Is_A B when circumstances dictate. Discussions also included the desirability (and complexity) of: associating substances with 'significant' metabolites [what is the threshold for 'significant'] associating substances with their immunologically active epitopes representing allergies to 'organisms' (e.g. uncommon companion or farm animals) where the only near representation is the organism itself - and not the allergenic component (e.g. dander). Finally we discussed the possibility of 'simply' reintegrating the 'tree pollen allergen' class and its associations into the related content - the intention would be to optimise retrieval, even if this was at the (temporary) expense of any preferred pure substance representation. The group agreed to share ideas as required - in particular this level of collaboration would hope to avoid duplications of work where common requirements could be met in both finding/disorder territory and substance/product territory. Next meeting - 20:00 UTC 15th May 2013. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri May 03 11:46:29 Z 2013	post8511	topc5863

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Call 31st October 2012 20:00-22:00 UTC [Note time (and season of clock changes)] (collabnet topic id: topc5166)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Call 31st October 2012 20:00-22:00 UTC [Note time (and season of clock changes)]	Dear all As indicated in the brief follow-up note to the Stockholm meeting [post7528] we have a project call booked for October 31st. The main purpose of the call is to clarify the outcomes of the face-to-face meeting, in particular the acceptability (and any outstanding decisions) for the allergy phase 1 proposal, and also to sketch out the steps for the next few months for allergy and the X with Y topic. I appreciate that some of those who wish to attend may be travelling - apologies, but Bruce and I thought it better that we have the meeting sooner rather than later. Please note, it is the season for clock changes [1], so please check what 20:00 UTC corresponds to in your local time. Call-in details: Line #2 Passcode: 54362 (Dial in numbers at [doc6192]) GoToMeeting: Meeting ID: 560-501-729 https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/560501729 Kind regards Ed [1] http://www.timeanddate.com/time/dst/events.html	edcheetham	Tue Oct 30 13:04:26 Z 2012	post7529	topc5166
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Call 31st October 2012 20:00-22:00 UTC [Note time (and season of clock changes)]	Notes from Call 20120131: In attendance Bruce Goldberg Ed Cheetham The main topic of discussion was the allergy model as discussed at the face-to-face meeting [post7490], including the modifications proposed by Stefan [doc6789]. Stefan's proposal removes the use of a primitive representation of 'pathological process', motivated in part by a desire to simplify any interim solution and also to avoid the paradox/conflict of characterising all SDP classes in terms of some kind of process. Ed and Bruce discussed this proposal at length. For the time being we have opted to keep the pathological process defining axis, not least because it provides a mechanism for formally distinguishing between autoimmune process-related disorders and allergy-related counterparts. Nevertheless there remains a concern as to what the specialisation (or non-specialisation) of allergy actually means. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Nov 13 16:35:43 Z 2012	post7577	topc5166

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday November 6th 2013 22:00 UTC for 1.5 hours (collabnet topic id: topc6241)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday November 6th 2013 22:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Dear all We have a project call scheduled for November 6th. I have set this up for 22:00 UTC which I hope will (a) not conflict with the modellers' call and (b) correspond to our recent call time now we have changed from daylight saving. Topics to discuss include: - Follow-up on any actions from the Washington meeting - Planning and conduct of X with Y testing work GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Nov 05 14:39:24 Z 2013	post9187	topc6241
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday November 6th 2013 22:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Dear all For info, we have started this call early (at 21:00 UTC) since the modeller's call started/finished early. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Nov 06 21:10:03 Z 2013	post9193	topc6241
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday November 6th 2013 22:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Notes from call: Present on call: Bruce Goldberg Rob Hausam Paul Amos Stefan Schulz Ed Cheetham Topics discussed Bruce fed back that the main outcomes from the Washington meeting for allergy topic were: Interim proposal for pseudoallergy model – {\|after\|=\|allergic reaction, \|causative agent\|=\|substance\|} Stefan restated that whilst this represents another way of using role groups, it isn't necessarily 'wrong'. Given that one of the original reasons for their use (non-availability of nested definitions) may well become invalid, IHTSDO may usefully reappraise the residual indications and semantics for relationship groups. Decision to inactivate history of allergy to x (with MAY BE A allergy to x). Some discussion regarding pollen/allergen substance concepts - looks like the additions summarised in doc6267 have not yet been made. Stefan pointed out that the concept 406474005 \| Entire pollen (substance) is not in the spirit of the substance hierarchy - assumed commitment is that substances are 'quantity of...' mass nouns rather than 'entire' count nouns. Ed to send a note to Matt Cordell just to make sure that this perspective is on the agenda for substance redesign. Brief discussion on 'substances as subtypes of 406455002 \| Allergen class (substance) and their relationship to allergy concepts. No hard conclusions drawn - working assumption is that this 'role' perspective is not considered in modelling constraints and is of little value to analysis. X with Y discussion: In order to "simplify" the review work, it is agreed that we will not include "syndrome" concepts (naturally these are likely to be Pattern 1 concepts unless we spend a lot of time looking for causation). Agreement that we will try a test set of ~30 concepts, with a commitment to populate the supertype and 'due to' columns. Intention to complete review by early of W/C 18th November for discussion/conflict resolution on 20th November (Next call will be at 21:00 UTC). Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Thu Nov 07 16:56:54 Z 2013	post9196	topc6241

IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday February 26th 21:00 UTC for 1 hour (collabnet topic id: topc6523)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday February 26th 21:00 UTC for 1 hour	Dear all Once again, I hope that we can have a brief call this Wednesday in order to: (1) try and work through the 5000 set to get consensus [doc9807] (2) discuss revisions to Yong's illustrative OWL files - Posted sequentially to message [post9422] - press 'update' button if only first January message shows. Most recent posts/documents are: [post9653] - condition and situation - ontological representation [post9654] - condition with situation interpretation [post9655] - situation only representation (3) Bruce's proposals for X with Y naming conventions for FSN revisions Many thanks to Bruce and Yong for producing this material for the call. GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Feb 25 16:13:09 Z 2014	post9660	topc6523

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 4th May 2011 - 20:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc2995)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 4th May 2011 - 20:00 UTC	Dear all We have a project call on Wednesday 4th May 2011 - 20:00-22:00 UTC Draft agenda: (1) brief recap of April 20th call (2) MAIN TOPIC allergy/allergic reaction model discussion (Bruce) - recap of current model proposal - substances/epitopes - relationship between the abstract process/structure classes and actual clinical notions (e.g. eczematous reaction, allergic dermatitis) - possibly - applicability of evolving allergy model to other familiar scenarios (epilepsy, Huntington's, diabetes) (3) AOB Call Instructions: Usual IHTSDO call instructions [doc3360] Line #2 Passcode 54362# Desktop Sharing GoToMeeting ID: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/840282848 Meeting ID: 840-282-848 Comments welcome. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue May 03 09:31:20 Z 2011	post4204	topc2995
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 4th May 2011 - 20:00 UTC	Summary notes of call 2011-05-04: Present on call: Ed Cheetham Bruce Goldberg Daniel Karlsson Kent Spackman Robert Hausam Apologies: Jon Patrick Cathy Richardson The majority of the call was concentrated on further revising and refining V4 of Bruce's allergy/reaction/disorder model [post4214]. The model itself was essentially unchanged, however a number of consequences/implications were noted, some new, some restatements of earlier points: (1) The need to support a current use case (with current modelling technology) which directly associates the allergy (disposition) class with the 'agent'. The V4 proposal (biotop-conformant) only associates processes with agents (via has_agent). Daniel suggested that there was nothing to stop the creation of a direct association - we would just have to avoid using the has_agent relationship. (2) Allergy (disposition) specialisation. Kent suggested that we might want to consider specialising allergy dispositions where they were associated with distinct realisations ('milk allergy realised as urticaria' would be distinct from a more general 'milk allergy' and a neighbouring 'milk allergy realised as rhinitis'). This has a certain appeal (maybe they genuinely are different kinds of milk allergy - in the same way that 'grand mal epilepsy' might be distinguished from 'epilepsy' and 'petit mal epilepsy') but this approach sits uncomfortably alongside a convention which would NOT regard 'diabetes realised as retinopathy' as being distinct subclass of diabetes. The counter-argument would be to see whether we could distinguish those dispositions whose realisations are dependent on patient characteristics (the same 'type 1 diabetes' is present in all affected patients, but has different manifestation profiles because of treatment compliance, comorbidity etc.) from those dispositions where the varied manifestation profiles are due to essentially different dispositions (? the milk allergy or epilepsy examples). No firm conclusion was reached, but this needs deeper consideration. (3) How to relate current SNOMED CT 'immune hypersensitivity disorder' and 'immune hypersensitivity reaction' classes in to the V4 model classes, and to align them with the 'condition/process/structure/disposition' proposal in Stefan's paper. Much of the current content beneath 'immune hypersensitivity disorder' should probably be regarded as 'conditions', and as such we then need to agree a standard modification to commit them to their specialised SDP classes when required - this might be achieved by role specialisation using a SNOMED version of Stefan's hasLocus/physicalPartOf/inheresIn proposal, reconciled with the relationships already proposed. Conversely, many of the classes beneath 'immune hypersensitivity reaction' are probably committed 'processes' (and could be modelled as such). Additionally, there will be a number of 'abnormal structure' classes which are essentially 'due to' one or more episodes of allergic manifestation (e.g. pulmonary fibrosis after prolonged aspergillosis); these probably require a further representational pattern to distinguish them from 'simpler' disordered structure specialisations of descendants of 'immune hypersensitivity disorder'. (4) Daniel was keen that the example models were reworked into OWL test files - making it easier to share dynamic example materials and (by peer reviewing the modelling) familiarising a wider group with OWL representation [see also post4193] (5) Next meeting - will likely have to wait until early June (either 1st or 8th) - I'll send a specific note on this. Comments & corrections welcome. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Thu May 05 15:54:07 Z 2011	post4224	topc2995

IHTSDO ECE PG: Project catch-up call 14th December 2011 21:00 UTC. (collabnet topic id: topc4157)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Project catch-up call 14th December 2011 21:00 UTC.	Dear all Apologies for the short notice (and lack of choice of dates), but can I suggest we have a call next Wednesday @ 21:00 UTC to catch up on the ECE project discussions in Sydney. As you recall I was unable to attend in person, and this would be a good chance for Bruce and I to compare notes and plan the project's activities for next year. We won't be making any significant design decisions, just clarifying the position reached in Sydney. Conference calls will resume properly in the new year with better planning. Dial-in and GoToMeeting details to follow. Kind regards and apologies again for the short notice. Ed	edcheetham	Thu Dec 08 16:53:35 Z 2011	post5987	topc4157
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Project catch-up call 14th December 2011 21:00 UTC.	Just to confirm: We have IHTSDO line number 3 for this call (#54362) and GoToMeeting thus: 1. Please join my meeting. https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/626637233 Meeting ID: 626-637-233 Principal agenda item - recap of outdome of Sydney meeting, discussion on allergy model and 2012 planning. Bruce's notes from Sydney posted as [doc5078]. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Dec 14 10:50:07 Z 2011	post6017	topc4157
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Project catch-up call 14th December 2011 21:00 UTC.	Notes from ECE call 2011-12-14 Present on call: Bruce Goldberg Stefan Schulz Rob Hausam Ed Cheetham Topics discusssed (1) Recap of Sydney face-to-face meeting. (a) Walk-through of Bruce's notes and subsequent discussion of the draft model. Acceptance that the draft model (intentionally influenced by 'good science' and 'ontological correctness' may require too many changes to existing content and legacy implementations), notably: The requirement for universal restrictions Nested definitions to indicate the 'simple' association between 'allergy to x' and 'substance x' Testing and introduction of several new attributes. The emergent proposal is described in greater detail below in the section NOTES ON DRAFT MODEL. The intention/proposal would be to introduce a number of changes using existing model and DL features which would be improvements in their own right, but also would serve as a 'staging post' for further changes as allowed by: - extensions to the available DL formalism - tested and validated extensions to the concept model - nested definitions - suitable transformations to reconcile new approaches with working deployments based on current model. (b) Combined disorders As Bruce's notes indicate, this topic was only briefly discussed in Sydney, nevertheless it remains a significant issue for this project group. Stefan reported on recent ICD11 JAG discussions on the ontological commitment of SNOMED CT and its relevant to classification cross-mapping. Current thinking resonates with previous discussions (e.g. background to 'situation with explicit context' chapter) and published work (Schulz & Cornet on SNOMED CT ontological commitment, Schulz, Rogers et. al. on SNOMED CT role groups), where it is understood that 'disorder' chapter content is better framed as an organised set of situations (with 'implicit' context) where role groupings can be thought of as 'includes' instructions. Stefan indicated that he would try to distribute an outline paper on this topic. (2) 2012 meeting schedule outline It was agreed that the ECE group would attempt to pursue the allergy and combined condition topics concurrently, alternating the conference calls with each topic. If this doesn't work then we'll reschedule. First meeting planned for January 11th 2012 @ 21:00 UTC [Allergy discussion]. Kind regards Ed ##################### NOTES ON DRAFT MODEL & outline 'phase 1' proposal. Implementation of the proposed model for allergic conditions will require: 1. Changes to SNOMED’s description logic in order to incorporate universal restriction. 2. Creation of several new attributes 3. Developing a method (attribute) to link disposition (allergy state) to agent (allergen) As such changes will be difficult to implement in the short run, a proposed interim model could consist of the following: Allergic disorder due to x isA Allergic disorder causative agent x due to allergic reaction (to x) This is currently how most of the allergic disorder due to x concepts are modeled. It still needs to be decided whether numerous precoordinated allergic reaction to x concepts will need to be created or whether this can be done on an as needed basis Allergy to x. The disposition to allergy is currently modeled inconsistently in SNOMED as illustrated below: 419474003, Allergy to mold (disorder) isA allergy 294404005, acetic acid allergy (disorder) isA allergy to substance isA propensity to adverse reactions to drug causative agent acetic acid 91929009, Allergy to anti-infective agent (disorder) isA drug allergy causative agent anti-infective agent has definitional manifestation allergic reaction to drug Most allergic dispositions to substances appear to be modeled with just the causative agent role but drug allergies also include the definitional manifestation role pointing to an allergic reaction. The latter model may be preferable as the definitional manifestation role resembles the proposed attribute has realization only Thus: Allergy to x isA Allergy causative agent x definitional manifestation allergic reaction (to x) The above models for allergic disorder and allergic disposition would be expected to lead to a consistent model for allergic dispositions and processes and would enable the capture of the allergen trigger directly in the definitions rather than indirectly through allergic reaction. It is realized that causative agent is not the perfect role for describing the relation of the allergen to the disposition or disorder but it may suffice for the time being until a more robust attribute can be defined and adopted.	edcheetham	Fri Dec 16 16:48:21 Z 2011	post6022	topc4157

IHTSDO ECE PG: Discussion prior to possible joint session with observables group - 14th March - TBC (collabnet topic id: topc2824)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Discussion prior to possible joint session with observables group - 14th March - TBC	Dear all [Once again apologies for messing up last night's call.] Bruce and I did get the opportunity to have a discussion with Daniel with regard to the issues being encountered by the observables group. Basically there seem to be three patterns of overlap with areas of likely discussion with the ECE group: (1) a noticeable but incompletely circumscribed set of "findings" which are essentially counterparts of corresponding observables (e.g. 366161004 \| Finding of venous pressure (finding) == 252076005 \| Venous pressure (observable entity)). In many cases these are associated by 'interprets' relationships, but not always, and many of the findings then subsume more "committed" subtypes with some kind of 'interpretation" (e.g. 69791001 \| Increased venous pressure (finding) (again with incomplete modelling). (2) a proportion of findings with "interpreted" values can be defined using current interprets<>has interpretation mechanisms, but the limits of 'has interpretation' expressivity seem arbitrary. (3) there are already observables (such as 399725006 \| Location of tumour within eye (observable entity)) which appear to offer an alternative approach to defining more familiar 'disordered structures'. It's not clear whether 1 represents an in-scope problem or not, or whether it's just an unavoidable consequence of attempting to organise nominalised observable+value findings. For 2 & 3 it would be useful for the two project groups to discuss the merits of various defining strategies. It has been argued that if findings are defined in terms of their related observable and interpretation, then equivalence can be maintained (e.g.[1] below), but there are demonstrable cases where the observable/value split used in such definitions is arbitrary - see attachment). Likewise, it is likely that there needs to be a reproducible boundary where such an approach would not be valid. For example, currently we would not rush to define 127001008 \| Neoplasm of choroid (disorder) in terms of the earlier observable, but given its availability, we need to describe why one approach or other is preferable. Comments and discussion welcome, and we will clarify the date/time of any joint meeting. Kind regards Ed [1] Rector AL, Brandt S. Why do it the hard way? The case for an expressive description logic for SNOMED. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2008 Nov-Dec;15(6):744-51. PMID: 18755993	edcheetham	Thu Feb 17 12:03:38 Z 2011	post3766	topc2824

IHTSDO ECE PG: Next ECE call - 26th November or 3rd December? (collabnet topic id: topc7298)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Next ECE call - 26th November or 3rd December?	Dear all Following on from the face-to-face meeting (and a tactical call hiatus during the busy international editing period), it would be good to have at least one call before Christmas. Might I suggest we stay with 21:00 UTC as a time. For the date, my first preference would be 26th November (with an option on one more call in December). If this is difficult for others, happy to do 3rd December. Views welcome. Kind regards, and thanks again for all the input to the Amsterdam meetings. Ed	edcheetham	Wed Nov 19 16:52:06 Z 2014	post10799	topc7298
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Next ECE call - 3rd December 21:00 UTC	Dear all Thanks to Bruce, Paul and Yong for prompt feedback. Based on this the next call will be 3rd December 21:00 UTC. I understand that Yong will be unable to make this date. The main topics to discuss will be the actions from the face-to-face meeting, and outlining what we want to achieve next year (and how). Paul has also asked that we spend a bit of time clearing up any residual problems with the diabetic complications work - hopefully we can discuss some of these on the list beforehand. GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Thu Nov 20 13:03:59 Z 2014	post10801	topc7298
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Next ECE call - 26th November or 3rd December?	Notes from call December 3rd 2014 [Apologies for the delay in posting] Present on call Ed Cheetham Bruce Goldberg Apologies Paul Amos Topics Discussed: Time on this call was essentially spent planning next year’s activities. Central to this were the ideas agreed at the Amsterdam meeting and presented at the plenary session (in particular the ‘priorities’ for work to be done). As a reminder these were: ? Progress ? Extending use of ‘X with Y’ work into routine editing ? Increased familiarity with published allergy model ? Extended our understanding or complex ‘X with Y with Z’ ? Challenges ? Attempt extension of approach applied to allergies (‘SDP’) into other content areas ? Keep ‘X with Y with Z’ approach realistic and achievable ? Priorities ? Produce dedicated modelling guide for ‘X with Y’ approach ? Produce allergy model description for proposed implementation guide ? Improve and test approach to ‘X with Y with Z’ content Building on these topics, discussion included: 1. Allergy implementation guide: Further development of section explaining the current SNOMED CT allergy model, in particular exploring its historical background, the use cases supported, differences between the aspirational and interim/tactical models, the application of the SDP approach, the arguments for breaking out ‘pseudoallergy’ as a distinct entity and the analysis implications of the resultant design. Action: Bruce [done – first draft sent to Jim] 2. Authoring guide for X with Y content. As discussed in the meeting, there would be value in taking the content of the current documents (the project group’s working draft and the relevant sections of the elaboration document), attempting to optimise the material against desirable features discussed in Amsterdam. In addition we shall try to incorporate: A clearer understanding of the use of ‘after’ in concept modelling (using...) A version of Allen’s interval algebra as applicable to healthcare terminology. Action: Ed [In progress] 3. XYZ topic. Recognising that there is still work to be done here, it would be good to: Arrange a ‘repeat performance’ of Yong’s Amsterdam presentation (hopefully to a wider audience, as a webinar) Consider Stefan’s suggestion that this work could eventually be reframed as a research paper Eventually incorporate into modelling guidance. 4. Extend the SDP approach as applied to allergies onto other areas of representation. Need to develop mini-project to do this systematically. Whilst we can ‘guess’ as the areas to use for testing, it would probably be better to use a meaningful sample influenced by the diagnoses highlighted during the development of the gp/fp reference set (and other relevant subsets such as the KP/Kaiser set and the NLM core set). As ever this can be a mixture of structured ‘homework’ and interactive experimentation on the calls. 5. Next call: date to be agreed – possibly for 21 or 28 January 2015 Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Thu Jan 08 15:59:36 Z 2015	post10886	topc7298

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call MONDAY 18th May 2015 2000 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc7500)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call MONDAY 18th May 2015 2000 UTC	Dear all We have another call planned for MONDAY 18th May 2015 20:00 UTC. The main topic is to discuss and edit a draft of some editorial guidance on combination concepts [doc12447]. If there is any time left over then we can continue to explore how to extend the allergy model to other disorders (updated working slides at [doc12394]). GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri May 15 16:04:38 Z 2015	post11217	topc7500
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call MONDAY 18th May 2015 2000 UTC	Dear all Please find uploaded as [doc12447] a new version of the X with Y guidance document following my call with Yong on 18th. Main point discussed/changes made are: - We have extended the 'truth table to include more temporal options (thus making room for the distinct causal and temporal combinations needed. - We have moved the causative agent section of the detailed guide to an addendum - I have coloured the sections of the document for ease of reading (this would not be present in an official editorial document), and we have deliberately resisted the temptation to include diagrams just to keep the document short. I would also note that Bruce commented that the Temporal sequencing (without necessary implication of causation) section is still problematic. This may be because of unsuitable example choices, or may be because it is very hard to find examples where causation is not implicitly present. We have, however, continued with this section, since the notion of 'after' is useful (the causal factor is definitely not included in the life phase being described). The proposal also leaves room for the introduciton of a 'due_to_and_after' role. Please note, as discussed, there will be no project group call on June 1st (I am away), but I hope we will be able to resume on June 15th @ 2000 UTC Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Sun May 31 15:05:12 Z 2015	post11257	topc7500

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE project call postponed again (collabnet topic id: topc6406)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE project call postponed again	Dear all I regret that I am not going to be able to make the call again that we tentatively scheduled for this week. I'm really sorry about this and hope that we can pick up again in two weeks (February 12th). If others would like to have a call in my absence then this is - of course - possible (I can share the logini details for the project's GoToMeeting with a new host, and the review documents are linked from the previous invitatioin [topc6374]), but if you are happy to wait then we can just roll over agiain. Apologies once again. Ed	edcheetham	Tue Jan 28 09:37:57 Z 2014	post9476	topc6406
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE project call postponed again	Dear all Many thanks to Bruce for hosting this call. Below are the minutes he kindly took. Brief notes from call Present on call: Bruce Goldberg Yongsheng Gao Rob Hausam Apologies Paul Amos Ed Cheetham Topics discussed. Futher review of test materials at [doc9475] & [doc9476]. Review extended to all those concepts for which agreement on modeling pattern was not unanimous (26). Results of review posted at [doc9722] Consensus reached on most terms as pattern 2. X associated with another disorder: agreed that this is an exception - classification derived. Difficult to determine direction of causation (if any) X due to Y: If Y is promptly reversible (e.g. obstruction, compression) most likely pattern 3. X with complication: Requires further discussion. If a specific complication is not mentioned, it would not be possible to decide whether pattern 2 or 3. Should these be considered Complication of X? If so, these are currently modeled using associated with. Needs further discussion Additional points: (1) Bruce discussed the use of "after" in SNOMED. Presented analysis of all terms modeled with after role. Most of these were newly added to support allergy disposition model. Most of the remainder apply to sequelae. In all instances, there appears to be implied causality. Questions: Are there instances in SNOMED where after is used to just represent a sequence of events without causality If not is there a use case for just representing a sequence of events and if not should after be made a subtype of due to? Decision made to discuss on a future call with input from Ed and Stefan Next call - planned for Wednesday 12th February 2014 21:00 UTC Kind regards & thanks again Ed	edcheetham	Tue Feb 04 18:42:33 Z 2014	post9536	topc6406

IHTSDO ECE PG: Call Wednesday August 13th 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours (collabnet topic id: topc7012)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Call Wednesday August 13th 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Dear all We have an ECE conference call planned for 13th August 21:00 UTC. We shall discuss our complex X with Y homework - posted thus: Bruce [post10408] Yong [post10409] Ed [post10411] Yong has also posted a fascinating set of slides on this topic at [post10410] and I hope that we can make time to talk through the ideas they contain. We may also wish to discuss: (1) the real-world example of "Hypertension in ESRD on dialysis due to DM 2" - initial discussion conducted on an email thread elsewhere. (2) content for the upcoming face-to-face (including joint session with mapping and implementation SIGs). GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Aug 12 16:19:50 Z 2014	post10412	topc7012
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Call Wednesday August 13th 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Notes from call 13th August 2014 In attendance Ed Cheetham Rob Hausam Bruce Goldberg Yongsheng Gao Apologies Paul Amos Main topic discussed: Most of the discussion concentrated on Yong’s presentation “Representation of multiple conditions as a situation” [post10410]. Here Yong presented a number of valuable ideas regarding a notation for representing complex combinations, as well as what can actually be represented using current DL expressivity. In particular a number of distinctly heteromorphic diagrammatic representations appear to resolve into isomorphic DL expressions (simplest example being patterns C and D resulting in the same definition). This has consequences for analysis (e.g. unwanted or unexpected causation), but a In addition Yong’s examples made a strong case for the judicious and clarifying use of parentheses in fully-specified names for highly compounded concepts. We discussed (ahead of next week’s modeller’s call) the practical consequences of adopting a strongly causal interpretation of the many ‘associated’ compound concepts. In particular, would any revision work inevitably result in inactivations (probably in the thousands) or could this be seen as a special case of ‘minor changes’ – unless true “>1 SAME_AS target ambiguity” could be identified? Likewise, should changes to existing concepts be made now, or can new content (with stronger causal links) be added and sit proximate to their vague current counterparts? We briefly discussed the first example from [post10413] (Chronic gastric ulcer with hemorrhage AND with perforation (disorder)) – this suggested the need for yet another (!) pattern in Yong’s set, and also helped to refine the possible distinction between a ‘rearranged FSN and a definition-based FSN. We plan to discuss the remainder in greater detail on the next call. Next call scheduled for 27th August 2014 @21:00 UTC Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Aug 20 10:41:56 Z 2014	post10434	topc7012

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Call 13th June 2012 21:00 UTC [note time - 1 hour later than usual] (collabnet topic id: topc4679)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Call 13th June 2012 21:00 UTC [note time - 1 hour later than usual]	Dear all We have an ECE call Wednesday 13th June 2012 21:00 UTC [1 hour later than usual to accomodate preceding Content Committee call]. Following on from the May 23rd discussion [post6697] the intention is to: Allergy Topic:- Agree model and initiate editorial document development June 13th call (6 weeks development time) X wth Y topic:- begin evaluating each of the test sets ([doc5919] and [doc5918] - details of 'methods' in the earlier post). Call details: Call: IHTSDO Line: 4 (Dial in numbers at [doc4950]) Passcode: 54362# GoToMeeting: Meeting ID: 148-250-369 https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/148250369 Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Jun 12 14:30:10 Z 2012	post6813	topc4679
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Call 13th June 2012 21:00 UTC [note time - 1 hour later than usual]	Notes from ECE call 13th June 2012 Present on call: Bruce Goldberg Ed Cheetham Stefan Schulz Rob Hausam Open discussion with Bruce about editorial guide Note to kent about role grouping 'due_to' etc. in owl rendering. Main discussion concentrated on the examples available in [doc5919] and [doc5918]. As is so often the case blanket interpretations proved troublesome, notably here with respect to a 'situation' interpretation of "'manifestation' due to 'disposition'" constructs. In the case of 111575000 Anemia due to membrane defect (disorder) it seemed fair to conclude that both the disposition and the manifestation would both be 'included' in a situation interpretation. On the other hand, 310647000 Anemia secondary to renal failure (disorder) may not necessarily 'include' the renal failure component in a situation interpretation. Nevertheless, the (already suggested and partially implemented) option of representing "'manifestation' due to 'disposition'" constructs as 'is_a = manifestion' and 'due_to = disposition' seemed to gain support for many 'due to' content. There is still work to do reconciling this approach with a suitable approach to "'disposition' with 'manifestation'" constructs. These may be intended to mean the same thing (manifestation due to disposition) or may mean that variant of the disposition which characteristically manifests in a particular way. Stefan wondered whether reproducible decisions could be found for characterising disposition/structure/processes related by due_to and various temporal assumptions. In addition more work is needed on representing A+B+(C or D or E) 'syndromes'. Looking at the OWL rendering of the sample module, concern was expressed with the Perl scripted convention of Role Group nesting single 'due to' roles. Next steps: (1) continue with investigating the sample data (2) review the draft allergy proposal (which may need to be more disruptive than the original 'interim' suggestion) and continue with plans to develop an editorial guide. (3) Ed to report the role group concern to Kent. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Jun 22 16:50:52 Z 2012	post6898	topc4679

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call 1st April 2015 21:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc7444)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call 1st April 2015 21:00 UTC	Dear all Our next call will be this Wednesday - April 1st at 21:00 UTC. This time is not ideal (particularly for (a) participants on CET - UTC+2 which is getting pretty late) and (b) Yong, whom I know to have a conflicting appointment), but for now I can't think of a better time (I personally have a call at 20:00 UTC). Whatever, it will be great if anyone is able to attend (!), and it would be good to discuss: (1) the notes/minutes from the February call (summarised in [doc11965]). (2) Continue to explore how to extend the allergy model to other disorders (rough outputs from February in the slide deck at [doc11966]). (3) Consider whether there is a better day to meet! Wednesday is getting pretty crowded. GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon Mar 30 15:40:20 Z 2015	post11097	topc7444

IHTSDO ECE PG: NEXT ECE call - postponed (collabnet topic id: topc7543)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: NEXT ECE call - postponed	Dear all Due to a competing commitment I regret that I shall not be able to host a call this Monday 29th June. I suggest therefore that we postpone until... Monday 13th July @20:00 UTC. Apologies for the inconvenience this will cause. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Jun 26 13:17:00 Z 2015	post11316	topc7543

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Monday 3rd August 20:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc7583)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Monday 3rd August 20:00 UTC	Dear all We have a planned meeting of the ECE group on Monday 3rd August 20:00 UTC. (1) Hopefully we can continue to make progress on extending the allergy model to other disorders (rough outputs in the slide deck at [doc11966]), continuing to work through the KP 2500 list with rankings. Note, I have also prepared an owl module of the top 100 KP concepts here [doc12824]. SHould load into Protege and classify as intended. Each member can be found by prefixing the search term with SET_ (e.g. SET_A will return asthma, allergy, anxiety etc.) (2) Confirm meeting time for Uruguay - plan topics for discussion. GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Sun Aug 02 17:42:41 Z 2015	post11381	topc7583
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Monday 3rd August 20:00 UTC	Notes from call: Present on call: Ed Cheetham Penni Hernandez Bruce Goldberg Rob Hausam Topics discussed: The group discussed a couple of specific items: (1) A set of requests of the form 'disorder during procedure' (hypotension, injury to diaphragm/bladder...). Whilst we have tried hard to stop using 'associated with' for disorder concepts, there may still be a place for its use in this setting. The alternatives are probably more unattractive: A Pattern 1 of IsA procedure + IsA disorder creates cross-kind concepts not currently legal in SNOMED CT (perhaps valid in some unspecified future) and the use of 'after' - given its current definition according to our interpretation of Allen's algebra would not cover d'uring'. (2) the options available to managing 'skull fracture with/without coma' as being studied in Jean-Marie Rodrigues' CT project on this topic. The reification option is attractive for allowing'similar' content to be proximate despite the negation, but it remains hard to see how this can consistently be applied. Not all negation can/should be represented this way, and 'proper' DL negation may still cause problems scaling to current classifiers [this statement can't be backed up, and Bruce/Rob subsequently corresponded regarding the Snow Owl classifier for negation and KP experiences]. (3) the group also explored/experimented with the test OWL file at doc12824. A second file doc12890 has been posted including speculative/experimental changes made during the call. It includes changes to finding concepts to introduce and define 'condition', 'disposition', structure' and 'process' classes. 'Disposition' is defined with has_realisaton=process - as have been some example disposition concepts (e.g. DM). More of this later. Actions. The group has agreed to think about what can/should be achieved in Uruguay. Next meeting: Date to be arranged - I shall circulate an invitation in early September - provisionally scheduled for 21st September 20:00 UTC (3rd Monday so as not to collide with Observables). Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Aug 19 15:09:25 Z 2015	post11420	topc7583

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call 23rd May 2012 20:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc4575)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call 23rd May 2012 20:00 UTC	Dear all The next ECE call is scheduled for23rd May 2012 20:00 UTC Call: IHTSDO Line: 2 (Dial in numbers at [doc4950]) Passcode: 54362# GoToMeeting: Meeting ID: 790-901-537 https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/790901537 Main topic of call will be the X with Y / X without Y subject. I'm conscious we're a bit stuck on this topic - so it would be good to spend some time trying to agree a realistic goals for the group, and the likely steps needed to reach them. As previously posted, the main materials we have been working from are: a. Use cases (including Bruce's updated version) at [doc5469] b. Bruce's draft inception document ('X with Y, X due to Y' is at [topc4223].) c. Details of last significant X with Y call [post6297] Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon May 21 16:18:53 Z 2012	post6677	topc4575
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call 23rd May 2012 20:00 UTC	Notes from call: Present on call: Ed Cheetham Bruce Goldberg Apologies: Jon Patrick Main topic discussed: Consideration of best approach to progress for the X with Y and Allergy topics. Allergy Topic: Based on a speculative reworking of the observables test plan, it was suggested that we need (a) agreement on a stable model design and (b) development of a draft modelling/editorial guide. WIth these it would be possible to undertake testing of a sample of content. PRoposed timescale: - Agree model and initiate editorial document development June 13th call (6 weeks development time) - Undertake testing (4 weeks) [using similar quality criteria to evaluate as used in observables work [doc5304]] - Write up report materials (2-4 weeks) - Present findings at Stockholm IHTSDO meeting. X wth Y topic: Agreement that we are at an earlier 'maturity' stage than for allergy topic. Much work has already been theoretically done (summarised in Bruce's inception document (along with the 'sequelae' inception and elaboration documents)), and it may therefore be fruitful (and, frankly, refreshing) to test out some of the design ideas outlined in these papers. In particular Bruce suggested a test approach which retained the causal (due_to) and temporal (after) relations and treats 'syndrome' and 'syndrome-like' concepts with multiple IsA relations. Ed has therefore produced a test module of relevant concepts using the 'owl module extractor'. The sample is made up of: 20% of concepts containing the following words/phrases in their FSNs: associated with due to after following secondary to caused by minus any where 'causative agent' relationships have already been used (this exercise should concentrate on combined disorders/procedures, not combinations of disorders and organisms/substances) [20% identified by limiting to those with a check digit in their ConceptId of 0 or 1] and 10% of concepts with 'syndrome' in their FSNs [10% identified by limiting to those with a check digit in their ConceptId of 0] This set is found in the 'NoCausAgLite_Syn' tab of the Assocated with_Syndrome.xlsx spreadsheet [doc5919] The sample has a total of 535 rows. Due to a quirk of the list generation mechanism, the syndromes are at the bottom of the list, ordered by term length (with Jung syndrome at row 385). The resulting module (using the BOTTOM algorithm) expands to 9038 classes [doc5918]. Bruce and I have agreed that we will begin evaluating each of the test set, using the design approach above (due to, after, syndrome isas), and either just commenting in the spreadsheet as to the suitability of the existing modelling, and/or modifying the existing definitions in the test data. This first pass will probably not be terribly robust, but hopefully we will learn something [not least improving the methodology!]. We discussed other modelling options (such as a simplified 'IsA' everything that's mentioned, and considering how to integrate this task with the SDP/condition work), but in the first instance it might be cleaner to concentrate on evaluating the 'due to. after and syndrome' approach. Other actions: Book next call - 13th June 20:00 UTC. Evaluate visio diagram of allergy proposal at [post6621] Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri May 25 13:32:11 Z 2012	post6697	topc4575

IHTSDO ECE PG: Project call 14th March 2012 20:00-22:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc4406)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Project call 14th March 2012 20:00-22:00 UTC	Dear all The next ECE call is scheduled for 14th March 2012 21:00-23:00 UTC NOTE: Note Daylight saving times begin around now, e.g. USA, Canada Clocks begin Daylight Saving Time on 11 March 2012 at 2am local time, and UK / Europe: Clocks begin Daylight Saving Time on Sunday 25 March 2012 01:00 GMT. Call: IHTSDO Line: 4 (Dial in numbers at [doc4950]) Passcode: 54362# GoToMeeting: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/931765544 Meeting ID: 931-765-544 Agenda: 1. Review of minutes from March 14th call (allergic 'condition' specialisation proposal) 2. Review and elaboration of X with Y use cases: a. Use cases (including Bruce's updated version) are at [doc5469] b. Bruce's draft inception document ('X with Y, X due to Y' is at [topc4223].) c. Details of last X with Y call at [post6297] Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Mar 27 07:46:24 Z 2012	post6415	topc4406

IHTSDO ECE PG: Project call 15th February 2012 21:00-23:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc4269)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Project call 15th February 2012 21:00-23:00 UTC	Dear all The next ECE call is scheduled for 25th January at 21:00 UTC. Outline agenda: Review of minutes & items arising from 25th January call [post6140] Allergy topic: Review of draft SDP allergy model. Visio diagram at [topc4224] The Dispostion-reaction-agent component seems to be stable (interim and longer term proposals), but Bruce has pointed out that we need to reassure ourselves that the 'disorder' aspects of the model are (even if not finalised) consistent and appear to meet the identified use cases. AOB Dial-in details: IHTSDO Line: 3 (Dial in numbers at [doc4950]) Passcode: 54362# GoToMeeting: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/432609992 Meeting ID: 432-609-992 Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Feb 14 14:35:36 Z 2012	post6198	topc4269
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Project call 15th February 2012 21:00-23:00 UTC	Sorry - copy 'n' paste error in the body of this note... To confirm, this call is happening on 15th February 2012. *Time travel not required (in particular, the difficult 'into the past' variety)* Ed	edcheetham	Tue Feb 14 14:44:17 Z 2012	post6199	topc4269
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Project call 15th February 2012 21:00-23:00 UTC	Many thanks to all those who participated in the call 15th February. Notes from call Attendees: Bruce Goldberg] Stefan Schulz Jon Patrick Rob Hausam Ed cheetham Topics discussed: Review of minutes from January 25th. Stefan reported that there is still some uncertainty regarding the definition of situation in the wiki materials at http://informatics.mayo.edu/WHO/ICD11/collaboratory/projects/situations-conditions/wiki In particular there remains some concern that the 'episode of care' definition (understandable for classification cross-mapping) may be too stringent for general-purpose use. Stefan had previously circulated a draft of the document "Ontology-based convergence of medical terminologies: SNOMED CT and ICD 11". WIth his consent this draft is now posted at [doc5346]. (Long!) discussion around the allergy class model [topc4224] - revision posted at [topc4280]. Main issues raised: (1) Principal use case supported by "allergic disorder" classes remains that described previously as "Use case 3": recording of 'allergic disorder' statements (e.g. allergic urticarial reaction) and their possible agent specific variants. Defining property that distinguishes them as 'allergic' will be the isOutcomeOf -> allergic reaction (agent specific if needed). There are essentially two kinds of 'pathologic structure' - structures as outcomes of processes (as for allergic disorders) and disordered structurees as bearers of dispositions (not discussed during this session, but implicit in the 'allergen-specific IgE' class [Ed - perhaps various substances and body structures (including molecular notions such as DNA) would be the natural SNOMED CT 'bearer' disordered structures?]. (2) Discomfort regarding the influences of the Sydney discussions on the top-level structuring of this diagram. The topc4224 version shows D & P classes with IsA relationships to the disorderd structure class. Whilst achieveing support for the SDP distinction may require some compromise, this would be too much of a return to the 'old order'. A more conventional organisation is presented in topc4280 but there is still, perhaps, some uncertainty regarding the best way of characterising SNOMED CT's disordered structures and their relationship to other material entities (such as 'body structures', 'substances' and 'morphological abnormalities'). Later discussions on the call suggested that morpological abnormalities might be recast as 'qualities' (rather than structures). This might allow a convergence between SNOMED CT's content and favoured formal representation, without significantly disturbing the current content. (3) Introduction of 'Pathologic structure or process' disjunction (see topc4280 posting). Inspection of the content which needs to be represented (e.g. 'allergic rhinitis') identifies residual ambiguity between processes and structures. The suggested disjunction class would allow us to represent 'those conditions which aren't dispositions' without definitely committing to them being disordered structures. Next call: Wed, 29 February 21:00 - 23:00 UTC Line #3 Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon Feb 20 16:50:04 Z 2012	post6239	topc4269

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 22nd May 2013, 20:30 - 22:30 UTC [please note time] (collabnet topic id: topc5905)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 22nd May 2013, 20:30 - 22:30 UTC [please note time]	Dear all As discussed, we have a call today/tonight 22nd May 2013, 20:30 - 22:30 UTC. [Please note time is 30 mins later than usual] Agenda topics. Probably best to have a bit of a recap meeting on both the X with Y progress and the allergy work,so I would propose: 1. review of last call (Matt Cordell presentation) 2. X with Y - testing work and progress update (proposal document [doc7179] - other documents at doc7985, topc5803, topc5801 & doc8105 (synthesis of three individual ones)). 3. Allergy work - update on live modelling and next steps. GoToMeeting: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/924870689 Meeting ID: 924-870-689 As before, I've set this call up for us to use the GoToMeeting VoIP. However, just, in case, I have also arranged for an IHTSDO conference line. Conference call [dial-in details at [doc6192]): Line: Line no 2 Passcode: 54362# Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed May 22 12:56:33 Z 2013	post8580	topc5905
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 22nd May 2013, 20:30 - 22:30 UTC [please note time]	Notes from ECE call 22nd May 2013 Present on call: Ed Cheetham Bruce Goldberg Apologies Paul Amos Three main topics discussed: 1. SHRD call minutes. Follow-up and read-through of joint meeting with Matt & SHRD project. Main point to come out of this (and as a response to the draft OWL file) was the need to establish whether/how the current draft approach can accommodate multiple varieties of 'organism component'. Notably the current examples concentrate on macroscopically homogeneous allergenic organisms (latex and peanuts). This solution would seem to extend easily to 'serum protein' as allergenic epitopes, but it is not immediately clear what subdivision mechanism would be used to specify the 'allergen' component down to 'parts and products' such as urine, faeces, epithelium flakes/dander and venom. 2. Allergy modelling. Bruce summarised the next steps for the allergy work. These are: Update text definitions Refine and improve the model for pseudoallergy Confirm approach to combination products Confirm approach to the small number of substances which can both provoke allergy and pseudoallergy. 3. X with Y. We reviewed the minutes for previous calls to identify the points raised which need to be fed back into the X with Y document - five clauses/modifications found - action on Ed to update the document (now version 6 at [doc7179]). Plan to perform another cycle of example testing - Ed to post a new spreadsheet (at [doc8332]). The plan is primarily to decide on which pattern to use rather than (necessarily) identifying parents/due to values - to make the task quicker. Next call Wednesday June 12th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue May 28 15:17:40 Z 2013	post8616	topc5905

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 20th February 2013, 21:00 - 23:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc5636)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 20th February 2013, 21:00 - 23:00 UTC	Dear all Here are the details of the call for 6th February 21:00 UTC: Agenda: 1. Consider any further modifications to X with Y proposal document [doc7179] 2. Discuss proposals/ideas for incorporating pseudoallergy [documents at doc7386 & doc7387] 3. Update on "pollen and pollen allergen" proposal 4. Review 'home page' update Conference call [dial-in details at [doc6192]): IHTSDO Line; #3 Passcode: 54362 GoToMeeting: Meeting ID: 216-800-968 https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/216800968 Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Feb 19 15:45:21 Z 2013	post8155	topc5636
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 20th February 2013, 21:00 - 23:00 UTC	Dear all Bruce has pointed out some issues encountered on the modelling of allergies to combination drugs e.g. sulfamethoxazole + trimethoprim. It would be good if we could discuss these on the call. Ed	edcheetham	Wed Feb 20 17:45:54 Z 2013	post8166	topc5636
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 20th February 2013, 21:00 - 23:00 UTC	Notes from call Present on call Bruce Goldberg Rob Hausam Paul Amos Stefan Schulz Ed Cheetham Main topics discussed (1) X with Y proposal document. Three main themes came out of this discussion. a. Early consideration of the mental health 'examples' suggested that a number of the 'event/process' components are more likely to be dispositions. In particular examples referring to the notions of 'panic attack' or 'nightmare' are not, for example 'agoraphobia (disposition) with a reported or witnessed panic attack (episode/process), but are more likely to be 'agoraphobia (disposition) with panic attack (disposition)'. On the other hand 'Acute fugue state due to acute stress reaction' is likely to be describing a combination of processes/events. Proposal that there should be a refinement to current singular/plural editorial guidance in the case of notions such as 'panic attack' and 'nightmare', where the 'disposition' variants are routinely named in terms of the plural ('nightmares' suggesting 'nightmare disposition'). b. Concern that the proposal to use due_to inside a role group to address the pattern 3 'Y due_to Y' concern is not helpful. Role group should be seen as a substitute for "includes" - relating a situation to a condition - any other use of role groups (such as putting the due_to relationship inside) is confusing. It is possible to interpret due_to as 'disposition' due to 'disposition', e.g.: Complicated hernia due to uncomplicated hernia Complicated hernia (disposition) due to uncomplicated hernia (disposition) Complicated hernia (today) due to uncomplicated hernia (yesterday) It is recognised that this is an 'interpretation' view - it would not be possible to track each hernia type specifically using SNOMED CT alone [as compared, e.g. to the Ceusters criticism of HL7 v3 RIM]. c. Regarding the X with Y with Z examples being developed, it was suggested that 190329007 \| Diabetes mellitus with hyperosmolar coma (disorder), although superficially an X with Y pattern, is more appropriately an example of X with Y with Z (diabetes, hyperosmolar state, coma). (2) Bruce presented his current work on pseudoallergies [documents at doc7386 & doc7387] Detailed discussion on a formal/suitable mechanism for representing pseudoallergy. During the call a proposal was suggested where pseudoallergy could be modelled like allergy if 'after=sensitisation' is replaced by 'after=pseudoallergic reaction'. This is attractive in that it both reflects clinical understanding (tho' see Bruce's note below) and is isomorphic with the 'allergy' pattern. Bruce has shared this note on the topic after the call: Thinking more about Stefan's proposal to model pseduoallergy by role grouping after pseudoallergic reaction with causative agent, I wanted to clarify a few points. I have mentioned in the past (but perhaps not strongly enough) that an allergic sensitization does not necessarily result in an allergic disposition. Rather, for an allergic disposition to occur, it must be preceded by an allergic sensitization. A practical example of this is food allergy. Both allergic sensitization and the allergic disposition to foods can be objectively assessed, the former by allergy skin or blood tests and the latter by oral challenge tests. Published data has confirmed the poor correlation between positive allergy skin and blood tests and oral challenges. Thus, for an allergic disposition to be appreciated, two process must have occurred: the sensitization plus a prior reaction. Based on Stefan's suggestion for pseudo allergic dispositions I am wondering whether allergic dispositions should have an additional role group of after allergic reaction+causative agent. Actions and next steps: Stefan - to document his thoughts on situation interpretation as applied to X with Y proposal [2x revisions of document already posted - doc7179] Group to review above contribution Bruce - to post eMeasure Issues Group Meeting allergy presentation [post8168]. Next call: Wednesday 6th March 2013 21:00 UTC. Need to review above materials/advances on both topics, and also make time to consider allergy to combination products. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Thu Feb 28 19:48:39 Z 2013	post8243	topc5636

IHTSDO ECE PG: Next (May) ECE call date (collabnet topic id: topc2977)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Next (May) ECE call date	Last night we settled on 11th May as the next call date. Cathy has rightly pointed out that this would precisely coincide with the Content Committee meeting. I think we should try to avoid this, so we have a few options: 20:00-22:00 UTC 4th May (two weeks away) 21:00-23:00 UTC 11th May (after content committee) 20:00-22:00 UTC 18th May (during HL7 WGMs Orlando). I think my preference would actually be for 4th May - less chance to forget what we've just discussed. Would this be OK, or is there a preference for the other options? Thanks Ed	edcheetham	Thu Apr 21 09:29:18 Z 2011	post4116	topc2977
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Next (May) ECE call date	Dear all Thanks for the feedback, based upon which I think we should try to have the next call: 4th May 2011 20:00-22:00 UTC The intention would be to build on the progress made so far with the allergy/reaction/disorder/sensitisation model. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Apr 27 15:08:22 Z 2011	post4174	topc2977

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 17th August 2011 - 20:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc3614)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 17th August 2011 - 20:00 UTC	We have a project call on Wednesday 17th August 2011 - 20:00-22:00 UTC Draft agenda: (1) brief recap of June 22nd call (2) MAIN TOPIC continued development of allergy/allergic reaction model discussion (recent OWL version topc3599) (Bruce) (3) reappraisal of corresponding use cases, and discussion of evaluation methodology Call Instructions: Usual IHTSDO call instructions [doc3360] Line #2 Passcode 54362# Desktop Sharing GoToMeeting ID: Meeting ID: 569-853-624 https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/569853624 Comments welcome. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Aug 16 15:22:10 Z 2011	post5122	topc3614
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 17th August 2011 - 20:00 UTC	Dear all, unfortunately I cannot participate in today's call. Please note my recent postings together with a modified OWL file of Bruce's example. I wish you a successful discussion ! Stefan	sschulz	Wed Aug 17 15:21:02 Z 2011	post5140	topc3614
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 17th August 2011 - 20:00 UTC	I will be unable to join due to travel.	kspackman	Wed Aug 17 17:15:44 Z 2011	post5144	topc3614
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 17th August 2011 - 20:00 UTC	Thanks for the notification Stefan & Kent. I suspect that this meeting will involve a bit of planning (in preparation for Sydney) and we will feed back accordingly. Hopefully we will have enough calls in the meantime for you to attend another one. Stefan - thanks for the OWl file - we will unpack and digest on the call! Ed	edcheetham	Wed Aug 17 18:28:29 Z 2011	post5146	topc3614
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 17th August 2011 - 20:00 UTC	Many thanks to those who contributed to this call. Present on call: Bruce Goldberg Rob Hausam Beverly Knight Ed Cheetham Jon Patrick Apologies Kent Spackman Stefan Schulz Topics discussed: (1) Emergent model for allergy representation. (a) Introductory discussion concerned the possible distinction (but synergy) between the wider allergy recording information modelling exercises and this work within SNOMED CT. Notably, it was suggested that the modelling within SNOMED CT was predominantly attempting to achieve the following: 'Make sense of' (by a trade-off between 'good clinical science', formal rigour and usability) the various representational classes already in, or required by, SNOMED CT: [Allergy to X] concepts [Allergic 'reaction' to X] concepts [Sensitisation to X] concepts [Allergic disorder to X] concepts and agree how each of these classes relate to one another and to the substance X itself In particular this has concentrated on achieving a reproducible distinction between the continuant 'propensity/disposition' allergy class and the 'countable' occurrent process or disordered structure phenomena such as the reactions and named allergic disordered structures (almost certainly at the expense of explicitly tracing back to the original use cases for which this content had been created). It is planned that a detailed consideration of current use cases will help to decide between certain design options and/or attenuate design approaches which may over-emphasise 'good clinical science' & formal rigour at the expense of usability. (b) Bruce presented the most recent model draft itself [post5148], specific topics of discussed were: i. Noting Stefan's critique/modification to the draft - thanks to Stefan for this work. The 'packing together' is certainly a valuable step in quality assuring the model, however full understanding of the work done and subsequent steps would benefit from further review and the opportunity for Stefan to explain the modifications on a call. Nevertheless, based on this work the allergic disorders were restored as 'pathological structures'. ii. Relating each 'observation class' to the substance itself. The group remains concerned that there is no direct link between Allergy to X and 'X' - instead this is achieved by traversing an 'allergic reaction to X' realisation class. It is understood that there is no absolute obstacle to relating dispositions and substances directly (which would be the pragmatic solution), but the has_agent role is restricted to process domains. iii. requiring that each disposition class is defined in terms of a 'reaction' realisation (and thence in terms of the agent). This is justified in terms of 'good clinical science', and appears to be consistent with one approach to fully defining a disposition (the other, preferred form being to define in terms of its bearer), but could be a rather indirect way of defining all SNOMED CT's allergy concepts. iv. inconsistent approach to mentonymy in SNOMED CT. The 'allergy to milk' example is perhaps unusual in that it identifies milk protein as the 'agent'. The more common approach is to refer to the causative agent in more general terms (e.g. the near-by 'cheese allergy' in SNOMED CT has 'cheese' as the causative agent). Whilst the issue of epitopes and cross-reactivity is more correctly a substance redesign problem, the ECE project activity should produce a model which can function satisfactorily with both a more general (metonym-based) convention for naming agents, as well as a more complex approach if this is developed. v. Combination classes. Bruce's examples include constructs such as "UrticarialReactionToMilk" - i.e. a combination of documenting an 'allergic reaction to milk' and an 'allergic urticarial reaction'. Given the likely possible combinations available it is speculated that full precoordinated support for this pattern may be unachievable, but that guidance will be needed to support this requirement. (c) Use cases. Based on discussions around the observation classes listed above, the following are offered as short names/descriptions for the corresponding use cases. i. basic "allergy to X" recording to assist in trigger [X] avoidance ii. recording more specific 'allergy to X specialised by manifestation pattern' (the allergy to X equivalent of 'v' above). iii. recording of 'allergic disorder' statements (e.g. allergic urticarial reaction) and their possible agent specific variants. iv. recording of non-specific 'allergic reaction to X' statements. v. recording of 'sensitisation to X' statements (+/- <skin test result/blood test result> variants) (d) editorial motivation In addition to the use cases identified, it is recognised that the following remain influential in deciding a modelling approach: representing 'good clinical science' respecting formal/ontological distinctions Actions: Ed: to complete minutes Ed: to expand on use cases 1-4 and compare these with known HL7-collated materials for clinical allergy modelling exercises - and begin process of extending/reconciling. Bruce: to consider use case 5 (sensitisation) to see whether this would include requirements to represent justifications for sensitisation assertions (e.g. of the form 'sensitisation to X demonstrated by <skin test result/blood test result>'). Next call: 7th September 2011 - Line# 2, passcode 54362#, 20:00-22:00 UTC Comments welcome. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Aug 19 15:18:58 Z 2011	post5152	topc3614

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday July 25th 20:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc4873)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday July 25th 20:00 UTC	Dear all We are due for an ECE call (Alergy Topic) on Wednesday July 25th at 20:00 UTC. Bruce has produced a couple of new files [doc6163] - owl and [doc6164] - Visio. Discussion will concentrate on these and on our plans in advance of the Stockholm WGMs. Call details: IHTSDO Line: 2 (Dial in numbers at [doc4950]) Passcode: 54362# GoToMeeting - TBA Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Jul 24 11:05:34 Z 2012	post7094	topc4873
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday July 25th 20:00 UTC	And here's the GoToMeeting... https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/431926728 Meeting ID: 431-926-728 Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Jul 25 15:42:06 Z 2012	post7096	topc4873
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday July 25th 20:00 UTC	By the way... I've just been asked whether the follwoing dates/times might be suitable for the Stockholm WGMs: Tuesday 23rd October pm Wednesday 24th October am These are certainly OK with me [I'll doubt I'll be there in person and will be dialling in] - how are they for other potential participants? Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Jul 25 22:13:20 Z 2012	post7099	topc4873
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday July 25th 20:00 UTC	Dear all Many apologies for my delay in writing up these notes. Present on call: Bruce Goldberg Rob Hausam Ed Cheetham Main topic discussed was the revised/near-finalised allergy model. Further stable draft & proposal to be posted. Main discussion around the interplay between the pathologic process defining axis and the relationship between the disposition and manifestation process axes. Next version of model proposal/elaboration document to follow. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Aug 08 15:26:59 Z 2012	post7154	topc4873

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 20th March 2013, 21:00 - 23:00 UTC [Note DST in US] (collabnet topic id: topc5771)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 20th March 2013, 21:00 - 23:00 UTC [Note DST in US]	Dear all Here are the details of the call for 20th March 21:00 UTC - please note that attendees from mainland US have now begun DST, so, for example, this will now correspond to 14:00 for those on PDT. I have (belatedly - sorry) posted a set of sample test concepts and an accompanying owl module at [doc7894]. Agenda: 1. Consider how to test patterns in X with Y proposal document [doc7179] using posted examples [doc7894]. 2. Further iscussion on pseudoallergy proposal [documents at doc7386 & doc7387] 3. Update on "pollen and pollen allergen" proposal 4. Consider allergy to combination products +/- allergy discussion on SHRD project [topc5706] GoToMeeting: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/596620969 This meeting is enabled for VoIP. Meeting ID: 596-620-969 Given its relative success last time, I've set this call up for us to use the GoToMeeting VoIP. However, just, in case, I have also arranged for an IHTSDO conference line. Conference call [dial-in details at [doc6192]): IHTSDO Line; #1 Passcode: 54362 Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon Mar 18 15:57:37 Z 2013	post8341	topc5771
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 20th March 2013, 21:00 - 23:00 UTC [Note DST in US]	Notes from ECE call 20th March 2013 Present on call: Ed Cheetham Bruce Goldberg Stefan Schulz Apologies Paul Amos Main discussion around (1) the allergy/pseudoallergy distinction and (2) the preferred modelling patter for each of these. Taking these topic in turn: (1) Ed gradually persuaded that the distinction could be reflected in the data (as different kinds of disorder rather than, say, different kinds of substance), but there would still need to be significant measures taken to allow use of this part of SNOMED CT in settings/by users where the distinction was not regarded as significant. So, for example: (i) any 'pseudoallergy' concept would need to carry a synonym of 'allergy' (ii) preferably existing abstract 'allergy to substance/drug' concepts would not be inactivated, but could effectively become the relevant disjunction 'allergy or pseudoallergy/hypersensitivity' classes. Nevertheless there is still no 'absolute' argument for making the distinction in the SNOMED CT data (the differences could be detected for analysis purposes by other means). (2) Stefan wondered whether there was really a need for the 'pathological process' axis to define the relevant classes - it seemed simply to restate what was implied by the various supertypes. Some agreement with this view (and acceptance that it would make modelling simpler), however it was explained that this aspect of the modelling approach was in part to create a consistency/continuum with the approach taken for autoimmune disorders. [note - Bruce has updated the relevant elaboration document at post8360. Smaller amount of time spent on the test approach for X with Y concepts. Agreement that we would first look at a small sample of test concepts [posted at post8347 - thanks Bruce] - as a Training set, and review these independently. We can then compare results on the next call. The test review would look to see which 'pattern' would apply (or exceptions - and why), what supertypes/due to targets would apply, and see if any consistency or systematic inconsistency could be achieved. Plan is to review this sample set independently and compare results on the next call. Next call is planned for Wednesday 3rd April 20:00 UTC [US/European/etc. on Summertime by this date]. GoToMeeting details/Dial-in to be posted early next week. Once again I'll set this call up for us to use the GoToMeeting VoIP. However, just, in case, I shall also arranged for an IHTSDO conference line. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Mar 29 12:16:27 Z 2013	post8382	topc5771

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 6th February 2013, 21:00 - 23:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc5515)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 6th February 2013, 21:00 - 23:00 UTC	Dear all Here are the details of the call for 6th February 21:00 UTC: Agenda: 1. Consider modifications to X with Y proposal document [doc7179] - including heuristics for determining 'exceptions' 2. Discuss/demonstrate allergy data in production environment and consider other disorder/manifestation patterns in the context of the allergy approach. Conference call [dial-in details at [doc6192]): IHTSDO Line; #1 Passcode: 54362 GoToMeeting: Meeting ID: 245-168-856 https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/245168856 Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Feb 06 13:08:39 Z 2013	post8019	topc5515
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 6th February 2013, 21:00 - 23:00 UTC	Notes from call Present on call: Bruce Goldberg Kent Spackman Rob Hausam Ed Cheetham Paul Amos Main topics discussed (1) Partial revision of X with Y proposal document [doc7179]. Further illustrative examples still to be worked up. Kent suggested that the role-group based solution for pattern 3 problems is an acceptable approach (Is_a Y situation due_to a Y condition (as defined in role group)). Agrees that we need to identify those failing cases [both to estimate numbers and establish an approach]. (2) Bruce demonstrated the changes made so far to allergy concepts in the production environment - notably the gradual adoption of the RG{Causative agent=substance X, After=Allergic sensitisation} pattern for named 'allergy to substance X' concepts. Probably because this section of the terminology has been quite carefully structured before, the changes made so far do not appear to have had a significant impact on content organisation. (3) Considerable discussion regarding an appropriate representation of 'pseudoallergy'. Main concerns are that (a) pseudoallergies are common [and therefore the distinction is well known] and (b) pseudoallergies don't require the 'sensitisation' step which we are proposing is defining for allergy dispositions in SNOMED CT. Example documentation posted at [doc7382]. (4) Paul asked whether project group members would be willing to review his inception and elaboration documents on diabetic complications as-and-when available. Current tracker item [artf222453]. (5) Further discussion on the problems with the separation between e.g. pollen and pollen allergen. Recogntion that there will probably be an 'ideal' solution as part of the 'substance hierarchy redesign project', but in the meantime there may be an argument for a (sub-optimal) approach - using current formalism and metadata constraints - to manage the risk of false negatives. Actions: Ed to revise 'X with Y proposal document' Paul to prepare 'pollen and pollen allergen' paper Bruce to work on pseudoallergy problem Next call - 20th February 2013 21:00 UTC Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Feb 19 15:45:58 Z 2013	post8156	topc5515

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call 28th March 2012 20:00-22:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc4407)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call 28th March 2012 20:00-22:00 UTC	Thanks to Jon Patrick Please Ignore earlier post - copy paste error & wrong dates /times Dear all The next ECE call is scheduled for 28th March 2012 20:00-22:00 UTC Call: IHTSDO Line: 4 (Dial in numbers at [doc4950]) Passcode: 54362# GoToMeeting: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/931765544 Meeting ID: 931-765-544 Agenda: 1. Review of minutes from March 14th call (allergic 'condition' specialisation proposal) 2. Review and elaboration of X with Y use cases: a. Use cases (including Bruce's updated version) are at [doc5469] b. Bruce's draft inception document ('X with Y, X due to Y' is at [topc4223].) c. Details of last X with Y call at [post6297] Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Mar 27 10:04:46 Z 2012	post6416	topc4407
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call 28th March 2012 20:00-22:00 UTC	Notes from ECE call 2012-03-28 Present on call: Kent Spackman Bruce Goldberg Rob Hausam Ed Cheetham Topics discussed: The intention had been for this to be an 'X with Y' call, further elaborating the use case slide set, however most of the discussion time was occupied with follow-up regarding a suitable approach to representing the 'allergic disorders' ( <<421668005 \| Immune hypersensitivity disorder (disorder)). Bruce presented a candidate class diagram with the '2 from 3' SD, SP, DP disjunction options as a discussion point. Action - Ed to post a list of descendants of 421668005 \| Immune hypersensitivity disorder (disorder) to allow review of whether they are (only) S, D or P classes [done at doc5700]. Next meetings planned as follows: April 11th 2012 21:00-22:00 UTC - 1 hour [later and shorter due to Content Committee call] April 25th 2012 20:00-22:00 UTC – 2 hours [on last evening of IHTSDO meetings, so may be difficulties for some in attending, but maintains routine and will at least allow some housekeeping for Ed/Bruce]. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Sat Apr 07 05:50:43 Z 2012	post6479	topc4407

IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 22nd June 2011 - 20:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc3126)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 22nd June 2011 - 20:00 UTC	We have a project call on Wednesday 22nd June 2011 - 20:00-22:00 UTC Draft agenda: (1) brief recap of May 4th call (2) MAIN TOPIC continued development of allergy/allergic reaction model discussion (Bruce) (3) Consideration of OWL representation as form for discussion (vs. live visio editing) (4) Consideration of Ed's Follow up comments [post4422] to Stefan's announcement re Disease Model paper publication [post4405] Call Instructions: Usual IHTSDO call instructions [doc3360] Line #2 Passcode 54362# Desktop Sharing GoToMeeting ID: to follow Comments welcome. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Jun 22 06:26:23 Z 2011	post4496	topc3126
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 22nd June 2011 - 20:00 UTC	And here's the GoToMeeting: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/633692744 Meeting ID: 633-692-744 Ed	edcheetham	Wed Jun 22 09:21:38 Z 2011	post4498	topc3126
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 22nd June 2011 - 20:00 UTC	Present on call Bruce Goldberg Rob Hausam Stefan Schulz Ed Cheetham Apologies Jon Patrick Topics discussed. (1) A considerable part of the meeting was spent reviewing the observations from May (with some digression into agenda item 4 - comments and feedback on Stefan's paper). Potentially useful points raised included: (a) There was further support for the subtype allergy flavors such as "milk allergy realised as urticaria". Ed remained concerned that these are comparable to 'diabetes realised as retinopathy' (which would not be a subtype of diabetes. (b) The nature of SNOMED CT's anatomy concepts. In order to participate in existential restriction definitions of disorders, they should not be regarded as canonical, however their current structure contains elements of canonical organisation. (c) The need to meet anticipated clinical need whilst also supporting prevailing 'scientific' view. This was prompted by the concern raised that 'allergy realised as urticaria' was comparable to 'diabetes with resultant retinopathy' (which would be handled differently in SNOMED CT). Stefan suggested that they are different - in that the latter is a 'complication' of the biochemical manifestation, but this could be countered by a view that 'urticaria' is similarly a 'complication' of the mast cell/humoral cascade - the only difference being timescales. Whatever, the (2) Concentrating on the 'allergy to hevein' example, the class diagram/model was discussed further. Main changes/developments were: (a) a proposal that any asserted disposition should include an outgoing inheres_in relationship to the most confident (and precise) structure. If essentially unknown this could be abstracted back to 'body structure' or 'organism', but could often be more precise (and more rarely extremely precise - e.g. a particular genetic abnormality). In this case precision would probably end at 'immune system structure'. (b) a feeling that the proposal is now pretty stable, and a suggestion that (based on 1c above) we should now cease modifying/extending, and instead concentrate on distinguishing the use cases satisfied by the proposal's components. Example use cases would be: (i) basic allergy recording to assist in trigger avoidance - how to achieve this without (albeit ontologically correct) intervening process classes (ii) ontological rigour and complete representation of 'prevailing science' (allergy defined in terms of its realisation processes and output structures). (iii) representing allergies specialised by their manifestation patterns. (iv) [not discussed on this occasion] - supporting the representation of 'sensitisation' Plan: (i) Ed to post these notes and Stefan's responses to Ed's comments on the disease model paper [post4405]. (ii) Ed to arrange the next call (iii) Bruce to post the most recent model (iv) all to consider the current model and compare its properties with the candidate use cases (or others) listed in 2b above. (v) attempt to test discussing/developing the draft model in OWL/Protege rather than Visio [For interest, the OntoGraf plugin in Protege 4.1 gives a pretty neat real-time visualisation of modelling changes]. Hope this is a fair summary. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Jun 24 16:32:10 Z 2011	post4526	topc3126

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call MONDAY 15th June 2015 2000 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc7530)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call MONDAY 15th June 2015 2000 UTC	Dear all Following a short break, we have another call planned for MONDAY 15th June 2015 2000 UTC. Topics to discuss are: (1) Review of the X with Y guidance document - thanks to Yong for excellent input on this - latest draft at [doc12447]. (2) Discussion on possibility / need for PG meeting during 25 – 28 October, during the the IHTSDO Business Meeting and SNOMED CT Expo 2015 in Montevideo, Uruguay. (3) Dust off the work done on extend the allergy model to other disorders (rough outputs from February in the slide deck at [doc11966]). (4) ICBO 2015 meeting attendance. GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Jun 12 14:14:13 Z 2015	post11297	topc7530
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call MONDAY 15th June 2015 2000 UTC	Brief notes from call Present on call: Ed Cheetham Bruce Goldberg Paul Amos Yongsheng Gao Rob Hausam Topics discussed: Detailed consideration of X with Y guidance document. residual concerns about several aspects, but generally felt to be useful: Reliance on plain 'after' is actually unusual for many disorder combinations, where causality is modally implied (Bruce to share data on this) Distinction between 'after' (as strict following temporal patterns) and 'overlaps with' is difficult to maintain - often the two are blurred, and in a sense the distinction is not valuable (if the situation may not include the causal factor [overlaps with], then for modelling purposes it does not include it [after]) Changes suggested to 'co-occurent' examples: Sinusitis co-occurrent with nasal polyps (disorder) Intermittent asthma co-occurrent with allergic rhinitis (disorder) Montevideo meeting: 3 of us expect to be at the meeting, so we shall request a half-day session: Submission includes: Work items for the meeting: A. Further development and testing of combined disorder concepts B. Further development and testing of application of allergy/(structure/disposition/process) modelling to other disorder/finding content C. Further development and testing of allergy model and integration with allergy list/allergy implementation guidance. Deliverables and outcomes linked to strategic items: These deliverables associate with the following content & mapping work plan items: A is strongly relevant to "ICD-11 alignment work" B is relevant to "ICD-11 alignment work" and "Allergy list" C is relevant to "Allergy list" Next meeting: Originally set up for two weeks time (i.e. Monday 29th June). I REGRET THAT I SHALL BE UNABLE TO MAKE THIS MEETING. SUGGEST POSTPONE UNTIL 13TH JULY. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Jun 26 13:15:14 Z 2015	post11315	topc7530

IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday April 2nd 20:00 UTC for 1.5 hours (collabnet topic id: topc6613)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday April 2nd 20:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Dear all We have a call this Wednesday where I hope that we can continue to: (1) try and work through the 5000 set to get consensus [doc9807] (2) discuss latest draft of X with Y document [TBD] GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP I think most participants will be on DST now, so I have adjusted the time to 20:00 UTC. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Apr 01 10:57:24 Z 2014	post9787	topc6613
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday April 2nd 20:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	The latest draft of the X with Y document is at doc7179 (version 9) - new section added title 'Editorial Process for considering X with Y constructs' Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Apr 02 15:22:42 Z 2014	post9797	topc6613
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday April 2nd 20:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Notes from call: Present on call: Bruce Goldberg Paul Amos Rob Hausam Ed Cheetham Apologies: Stefan Schulz Topics discussed: Most of the call was spent discussing the validity and utility of the new 'editorial process' section added to the X with Y proposal draft. The simplicity of the proposal was seen as attractive (and indeed there is a proposal to adopt/test it against current requests - see later), however a number of revisions/extensions were proposed: (1) Modification to the truth table to put patterns 2, 2a and 4 into the ‘causal yes, co-occurrence no’ cell. This requires an additional step for distinguishing between 2, 2a and 4. (2) Questioning the meaning of the ‘no relationship’ outcome (and whether this will ever occur). We were unable to produce a convincing ‘no cause, no co-occurrence’ example, however given the crude lexical methods for identifying candidate content, true false positives are a risk and will appear. Our slightly unsatisfactory narrow interpretation of ‘after’ (sequelae and allergy disposition classes) are formally regarded as ‘non-causal and non-co-occurrence’ so long as after and due_to are sibling (and thus effectively disjoint) classes. (3) Discussion took place on how to handle more than two conditions in a compositional concept. One proposal (cautiously incorporated into the document) is to test the relationship between each component, producing a set of binary relations, and build the concept definition (and thus pattern – which may be compound), out of each binary. In the absence of a competing systematic approach, it was suggested that the X with Y document is referenced by the IHTSDO authoring team when suitable/in scope content is identified. Additional process checks to keep track of its used would include: (a) Presenting all uses of the approach at the weekly editors meetings (or if infrequent, at biweekly/monthly meetings). Expecting all authors to be familiar with what may be a changeable guidance document would be unreasonable, so it may be better to hold back the examples and authoring activity to the discussion meetings. On the other hand, the ‘dual authoring/conflict resolution’ approach seems to work well with these modelling decisions, and this would be lost if all modelling decisions were made as a group. (b) Discussing all uses of the approach during ECE project team calls. The project group feels that an ‘active’ approach like this would help ‘test’ the approach – both for appropriateness and reproducibility. The current project group is well-attended by active content authors/IHTSDO consultant terminologists, so it is anticipated that there will always be one of the project team available for the editor calls if the topic is to be discussed. All the modelling options (with their corresponding patterns) are used in the data to some degree already, so no new modelling conventions or features are required. The only anticipated ‘oddity’ would be pattern 3 modelling, which requires the creation of both X Is_A Y and X Due_to Y relations; this is currently little used and may require some ‘discussion’. Plans: All – to review the X with Y document and consider how/whether it can be materially improved for presenting to authoring team Bruce/all – to consider options for dealing with >2 conditions. Ed – to prepare submission to content committee. Next call April 16th 2014 20:00 UTC Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Apr 15 14:51:35 Z 2014	post9848	topc6613

IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday June 25th 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours (collabnet topic id: topc6851)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday June 25th 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Dear all Following a month's break, we are planning to re-start the ECE project group calls. Ambitiously we shall try to cover several topics: (1) Review/update on the allergy topic - including a review of the proposal and the extent to which this is incorporated into the published data (2) An update on the Implementation/Map SIG allergy work, and how this will relate to the ECE allergy model. (3) Discussion on how/whether the 'X with Y' proposal is integrating with routine authoring (4) A report from experiences applying the SDP and Situation approach to ICD11<->SNOMED CT mapping work by Bob Dolin (5) Establish whether we want to organise a PG meeting at the October Business Meeting in Amsterdam. I'm easy about the order of the items - happy for item 4 to be taken first (so that Bob doesn't have to attend the whole call, and so it isn't too late at night for Stefan!). GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Jun 20 16:55:53 Z 2014	post10196	topc6851
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday June 25th 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Notes from call 20140625 Present on call: Rob Hausam Kent spackman Ed Cheetham Bruce Goldberg Yongsheng Gao Bob Dolin Stefan Schulz Topics discussed: Presentation by Bob Dolin on SNOMED CT / ICD11 alignment for dermatology: Initial work had indicated a need for guiding principles in this activity, and the situation interpretation/SDP-condition approach to managing content, as explored within the ECE project, has been investigated to this end. Although not unique, the language of dermatology is particularly vulnerable to process/disposition classes reusing the same names (eczema), and for the use of names which don't tightly couple to site/morphology expectations (not all erythemas are erythematous!). The SDP approach is useful for the name reuse problem, but will not help the morphology one. Discussion with dermatology experts has revealed discomfort with the notion of "diseases being kinds of findings" - the basic dermatology proposal looks to modify this by making both findings and disorders kinds of 'condition'. Other themes proposed/introduced were an emphasis on the use of 'has definitional manifestation' to define disorders/dispositions (with morphologic abnormality preferred for findings), and a proposed category of 'skin subjective experience' to handle notions such as itching and pain. The group were largely supportive of the proposal, although (1) suggested that 'has definitional manifestation' should be used sparingly (even in anticipaton of an eventual BioTop-derived 'hasRealiation'), since whilst often 'clinically valid' definitions based on this axis are weak discriminators, and (2) a suggestion that classifying some content as 'subjective experience' may bring unintended recorder/epistemic implications which would limit the use of content for statements made by other reporters. Reassuring parallels were identified between this work and the ongoing allergy content changes. A revised document is under development, and we hope that Bob will be able to join the group again after this is available to discuss progress. Kent explained some recent thinking which revealed difficulties in considering/naming finding content as 'situations'. A natural consequence of accomodating this approach would be to consider the published 'situation with explicit context' as 'information artefacts' - however there is a concern that this would be too disruptive to the content at a critical point in uptake. Update on allergy work. Bruce presented an update on changes to the allergy and related content in the live data for the July release: Pseudoallergy content - changes made to definitions (isomorphic with the allergy approach, but distinct values) but not carried through into this release Combination drug allergies - problem recognised but left open History of allergy to X - agreed that these most safely mean the same as 'allergy disposition to X' and should be analysed/processed as such, so these are to be inactivated as SAME_AS corresponding allergy to X. Bruce also reported on discussions with ICD 11 developers regarding the recording (or under-recording) of allergy and anaphylaxis due to the absence of a distinct ICD 10 category. At present Bruce is not in a position to push this actively, but is corresponding with the developers to this end. X with Y work and modelling: Yong reported that in order to keep documents aligned with activity, Kent has suggested that the X with Y document [artf6166] ought to be advanced to elaboration phase - Bruce will do this when he has the time. Face to face meeting Amsterdam in October: Group members keen to have a face-to-face meeting - suggestion that joint meeting with Map/Imp SIG regarding allergy work would be valuable. Action - Ed to request meeting from IHTSDO office. Next call 9th July 21:00 UTC - concentrate on complex X with Y examples. Ed	edcheetham	Fri Jul 04 09:52:54 Z 2014	post10272	topc6851

IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday March 12th 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours (collabnet topic id: topc6549)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday March 12th 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Dear all Once again, I hope that we can have a brief call this Wednesday where we can continue to: (1) try and work through the 5000 set to get consensus [doc9807] (2) discuss revisions to Yong's illustrative OWL files - Posted sequentially to message [post9422] - press 'update' button if only first January message shows. Most recent posts /documents are: [post9653] - condition and situation - ontological representation [post9654] - condition with situation interpretation [post9655] - situation only representation (3) Confirm the changes made to Bruce's document last time. GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP I note the adoption of DST in US last Sunday - I suggest we stay with 21:00 UTC for now and reconsider when all countries catch up. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Mar 11 15:43:39 Z 2014	post9695	topc6549
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday March 12th 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Present on call Ed Cheetham Bruce GOldberg Yongsheng Gao Topics discussed Bruce agreed to post the revised X with Y document as [post9702] and copied as version 8 of [doc7179]. Some discussion followed on whether/how it is possible to represent the distinction between primary infective/inflammatory and post-infective/inflammatory disorders (e.g. 9467007 \| Meningococcal arthropathy (disorder) vs. post-meningococcal arthritis). On first inspection this can simply be handled by modelling the former as an infection, the latter 'after' a more general infection. Bruce's question concentrated on whether there is a need to include formal mention of any intermediate mechanism in the latter - specifically the role played by immune complexes. Tentative conclusion was that this would not be included in the definition (trade off between 'good science/medicine' and practical terminology management). Another example/concern offered by Yong was 'traumatic neuroma'; at the moment the idea that this is 'post-traumatic' is only represented in the data via the specific morphology value (which mentions trauma) which is non-isomorphic with the current approach to the post-infective' concepts mentioned above. Yong demonstrated the demonstration owl files at and after message [post9422]. These are useful in that they illustrate the risks/benefits of a number of possible approaches which could be taken to the large-scale incorporation of the SDP (and X with Y) approach to modelling as well as the impact of modifications to the relationship between after and due_to (and corresponding disjointness axioms). Progressive feeling that isolated 'X after Y' concepts are actually rare - suggestion that 'only after' should be limited to sequelae (as 'situational after' and in the definition of allergy 'physiological after'). Post-script: Bruce and I experimented with the definition of 362977000 \| Sequela (disorder). This did have the effect of attracting a number of new subtypes (including 123976001 \| Post-infectious disorder (disorder) with its 239783001 \| Post-infective arthritis (disorder) descendants), but (a) doesn't work well with post-procedural subtypes, and also pulls in the allergy/hypersensitivity condition subtree [an allergy disposition could be thought of as a sequela of a sensitization but getting everyone to think of it in this way might prove difficult]. Next call scheduled for 2nd April 2014. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Mar 21 17:30:07 Z 2014	post9721	topc6549

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 28th November 2012 21:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc5244)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 28th November 2012 21:00 UTC	Dear all We have a project group call booked for Wednesday 28th November. Topics for discussion: X with Y topic: (1) presentation from Paul Amos on diabetic complications inception work (thanks Paul). (2) Bruce/all to identify a few new X with Y examples to work through live the call. (3) consideration of temporal extensions to the due_to relationship (as discussed in Stockholm) Conference call: Line; #3 Passcode: 54362 (Dial in numbers at [doc6192]) GoToMeeting: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/415153648 Meeting ID: 415-153-648 Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon Nov 26 17:58:28 Z 2012	post7634	topc5244
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 28th November 2012 21:00 UTC	Just in anticipation of item 2, here are a few possible examples to work through, picked up in part from using the longer list of 'connectives' developed for the Stockholm meeting: 237670000 \| ACTH hypersecretion not causing Cushing's syndrome along with 237734007 \| ACTH-dependent Cushing's syndrome & 237669001 \| Adrenocorticotropic hormone hypersecretion 105599000 \| Anemia related to disturbed DNA synthesis 402313009 \| Guttate flare of psoriasis with preexisting plaques 67359005 \| Pre-eclampsia added to pre-existing hypertension Ed	edcheetham	Tue Nov 27 16:25:16 Z 2012	post7643	topc5244
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 28th November 2012 21:00 UTC	Please also see Bruce's earlier postings at topc5209 ... (sorry Bruce - missed these). Ed	edcheetham	Wed Nov 28 11:47:52 Z 2012	post7655	topc5244
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 28th November 2012 21:00 UTC	Notes from ECE call 2012-11-28 Present on call: Ed Cheetham Rob Hausam Bruce Goldberg Stefan Schulz Paul Amos Topics discussed: Paul made an excellent presentation [doc6931] describing the work he has done under the consultant terminologist programme on: artf222453 Review concept model - Multiple complications due to diabetes A number of long-standing concerns with the current data were discussed, many of them familar topics for the group, notably regarding: - inconsistent correspondence between connectives in terms and modelling (associated with vs. due to etc.) - problems of co-ocurrence and causation (should Is_A Diabetes always be asserted, or should it be recoverable by discretionary use of associative relations?) Solution proposals included: - a recognition of the disease-specific pathophysiology (in this case microvascular consequences of DM) and FSN regularisation. - a need to investigate the current state with regard to class specialistion for each 'type of diabetes'. Current content, probably motivated by classification requirements, often differentiates each complication/consequence in terms of Diabetes types 1 & 2. Arguably certain features of data quality (not least 'understandability') could be improved by implementing a consistent approach regarding these distinctions. Bruce then talked the group through the first of a number of examples [topc5253] drawn from existing documents and personal experience. The relative merits of various modelling patterns (in terms of reflecting clinical reality, behaviour for retrieval and reproducibility of modelling) were considered. Examples concentrated on were: - Disorder of optic chiasm due to non-pituitary neoplasm (disorder) - Disorder of optic chiasm associated with non-pituitary neoplasm (disorder) Next steps The intention is to continue this analysis in the next call (12th December). Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Dec 07 12:07:12 Z 2012	post7726	topc5244

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday June 27th 2012 20:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc4745)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday June 27th 2012 20:00 UTC	Dear all The next ECE call is arranged for: Wednesday June 27th 2012 20:00 UTC for 2 hours. We have line #3 booked - GoToMeeting details to follow. As for last week, I would suggest that we try to cover both the allergy and the 'x with y' topics. For the allergy topic, there is a need to develop a draft editorial guide. For the 'x with y' topic (if materials are available) there is value in further discussing the experience of investigating a sample of due to and syndrome concepts. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Jun 22 16:51:58 Z 2012	post6899	topc4745
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday June 27th 2012 20:00 UTC	Hi The GoToMeeting details for this call are: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/331923729 Meeting ID: 331-923-729 Call: IHTSDO Line: 3 (Dial in numbers at [doc4950]) Passcode: 54362# Ed	edcheetham	Wed Jun 27 09:08:24 Z 2012	post6927	topc4745
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday June 27th 2012 20:00 UTC	Notes from call: Present: Bruce Goldberg Ed Cheetham Rob Hausam Apologies Stefan Schulz Main topic discussed was the proposed allergy model (in OWL) posted at [post6818]. A revision of this file is now at [doc6070] following the call. Main changes/issues related to: (1) a concern that the self-imposed restriction on roles (only using the current ones) would still be problematic - notably the use of allergy (disposition): causative agent=agent was inappropriate, and that at least a refinement here (to agent_of_manifestation or triggering_agent) would be a justified extension (2) a question as to the need (or not) for repeating the upper level 'condition' pattern (with SDP subtypes) for all named conditions. repeating this pattern 'fractally' for named condition classes has a symmetry about it, but risks resulting in undue complexity. In particular, if we agree that 'allergy' is a disposition then preserving a direct relation to 'allergic condition' would seem to be redundant. Next call [X with Y topic] 11th July 21:00 UTC [note time - to follow Content committee]. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Sat Jul 07 07:10:03 Z 2012	post6978	topc4745

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday June 12th 2013 21:00 - 22:30 UTC [please note time, to follow content committee] (collabnet topic id: topc5936)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday June 12th 2013 21:00 - 22:30 UTC [please note time, to follow content committee]	Dear all We have an ECE project call on Wednesday June 12th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours Agenda: 1. Review minutes of last call [post8616] 2. Review revised X with Y document [doc7179] 3. Review second phase X with Y materials [Test set at doc8332, output of testing at doc8427] GoToMeeting details will follow (account not issued yet) As before, I will set this call up for us to use the GoToMeeting VoIP. However, just, in case, I have also arranged for an IHTSDO conference line. Conference call [dial-in details at [doc6192]): Line: Line no 2 Passcode: 54362# Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Jun 11 15:56:45 Z 2013	post8645	topc5936
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday June 12th 2013 21:00 - 22:30 UTC [please note time, to follow content committee]	Here are the GoToMeeting details: Meeting ID: 577-210-704 1. Please join my meeting. https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/577210704 2. You will be connected to audio using your computer's microphone and speakers (VoIP). A headset is recommended. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Jun 12 09:22:17 Z 2013	post8647	topc5936
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday June 12th 2013 21:00 - 22:30 UTC [please note time, to follow content committee]	Notes from Call: Present on call: Bruce Goldberg Kent Spackman Ed Cheetham Paul Amos Rob Hausam Apologies Stefan Schulz Main topics discussed: (1) X with Y examples Most of the call was occupied with reviewing/comparing Ed and Bruce's responses to the second phase of the X with Y reproducibility testing. Points of note: (i) for 'named syndromes' there was some agreement (can't claim universal) that a rational approach would be to try and approach these "as if" they were X with Y with Z..." constructs, where X, Y and Z are the essential characteristics of the syndrome. At some arbitrary point such an approach becomes unfeasible, and then less satisfactory ancestors such as 'syndrome affecting multiple system' or 'syndrome with multiple congenital manifestations' may be used. When X with Y approach used this will often result in pattern 1 modelling (Cleft palate-lateral synechia syndrome), however where causal features are encountered (e.g. thymic dysplasia in Nezelof's syndrome) then Pattern 3 (or ? less commonly pattern 2) may be used. As underlying causal knowledge improves (e.g. distinct gene expression causes) then underlying 'due_to' targets (or similar) may be identified - as for the well-studied Huntington's disease model. (ii) Superficially unconvincing degree of agreement between Ed and Bruce - superficially only 12 out of 40 agreement on pattern, let alone whether we would agree on the target classes selected to fit that pattern. Nevertheless we did seem to agree on pattern 2 for 'injury due to X' where X is a firearm/explosion event as opposed to the 'injury due to ingestion/inhalation of a substance (however hot)' pattern (causative agent). (iii) Paul concerned that we still seemed to need considerable discussion before we agreed on a particular pattern. Understandably this is a concern, but perhaps it is progress that we could agree - despite having only a limited number of patterns available. Speculatively Ed suggested that perhaps there is something about this sort of content which (at least in the near future) means that we will not be able to get consistency by 'recipe-based modelling', and so should not be handled as such - as compared with, e.g. the modelling of frequently-occurring laboratory test patterns. (iv) A number of items/examples strayed into the pattern of 'after=procedure' - need to include this in our patterns and decision tree? (2) History of x (situation) and X disposition Bruce introduced some concerns he had around content of the form History of x (situation) where X is a disposition. Specific examples discussed mostly had X as "allergy to something". In particular, what did such a concept actually mean? The formal definition of 'History of X' have a temporal context value of <<410513005 \| In the past (qualifier value), so does this mean that the allergy has now gone away? Our suspicion was that this was not the case (although it could happen), but if so, the meaning of 'History of X' where X is an enduring disposition would appear to make them potential 'duplicates' but differently modelled. Some discussion was had as to the relationship to 'X resolved' and 'X in remission', and looking at the current data we might puzzle as to the intended meaning of 473342003 \| History of osteoporosis resolved (situation)? Actions - Ed to post a new test set [posted to doc8451]. Next call - Wednesday 26th June 2013 @ 20:30 UTC for two hours. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Jun 14 15:57:39 Z 2013	post8656	topc5936

IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday May 14th 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours: PLEASE NOTE TIME (collabnet topic id: topc6715)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday May 14th 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours: PLEASE NOTE TIME	Dear all We have a call this Wednesday where I hope that we can: a) discuss how best to introduce the X with Y process into routine authoring (in particular support, assurance and feedback aspects) b) discuss further how to handle >2 component combination concepts. c) consider how to advance allergy (or other event/condition distinctions) over the summer cycle. GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP PLEASE NOTE THIS IS 1 HOUR LATER THAN USUAL to accommodate an unanticipated preceding call. Hope this is OK this time and I shall see how best to deal with this clash. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon May 12 12:57:52 Z 2014	post9939	topc6715
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday May 14th 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours: PLEASE NOTE TIME	Notes from call: Present on call: Yongsheng Gao Bruce Goldberg Stefan Schulz Ed Cheetham Main topics discussed: Most of the discussion centred on trying to identify a systematic approach to the topic of "...how to handle >2 component combination concepts...". Previously Bruce had posted a spreadsheet of 'Complex combined disorders', and from this we used "Cortex contusion with open intracranial wound AND 1-24 Hr coma" as the focus of the discussion. The discussions were pretty unstructured, but there appeared to be two (possibly complementary!) approaches being used. Both required the identification each participating 'condition', but one 'kept all the components in one place' (approach 1, reorganising the term to place the 'caused factor' first, allowing the introduction of due_to to the term, and then analysing the re-ordered term) and the other (approach 2) systematically tested each component against each other one, and tried to put the result back together at the end: Approach 1 first produced: 1-24 Hr Coma due to Cortex contusion co-occurent with open intracranial wound [reordering] We then added in a previously-discussed step of 'bundling together' classes where simple co-occurrence was felt to be taking place (with the tacit assumption that this would be created as a concept in its own right: 1-24 Hr Coma due to (Cortex contusion co-occurent with open intracranial wound) This would then support a (pattern 3 - situation interpretation) definition of: 1-24 Hr Coma due to (Cortex contusion co-occurent with open intracranial wound) IsA 1-24 Hr Coma IsA (Cortex contusion co-occurent with open intracranial wound) DueTo (Cortex contusion co-occurent with open intracranial wound) Some debate followed regarding the validity of 'coma' being due_to the 'wound' (rather than just the contusion). Discussion supplemented by a rapidly-developed OWL demonstration suggested that unless formal representations became very complex/sophisticated, unintended causal inferences are highly likely to occur in compound concepts. By example, if the situation described by the above concept also included 'bilateral cateracts', then it would appear that the cateracts were also caused by the contusion/wound. This suggested a candidate heuristic for evaluating heavily composed concept requests where causation was included: does such a concept introduce falsely inferred causation? If so then simplify the concept until false inferences are removed or become acceptable. Approach 2 attempted to decompose the test concept into condition pairs, and test each for an associating pattern: First condition Second condition Judgement X[1-24 Hr Coma] Y[Cortex contusion] DueTo/Co-occ X[1-24 Hr Coma] Z[open intracranial wound] Co-occ/DueTo Y[Cortex contusion] Z[open intracranial wound] Co-occ ... This approach was explored less, but shows potential for both requiring the modeller to consider the relationship between each condition (in both directions), and requires a step to reassemble all these parts into a coherent whole (which, for example, may allow a systematic testing of the validity of all due_to inferences). We also discussed an example from Bruce regarding the significance of plurals in compound concepts (chronic schizophrenia with acute exacerbations vs. ...with acute exacerbation) - speculating on whether this can be used reproducibly to distinguish dispositions from conditions, and finally we discussed whether it is reasonable to model "viral hepatitis with coma" to mean "hepatic coma" rather than "any coma". The decision during the call was that this should mean "hepatic coma". Several of us have commitments in the next few weeks, so the next call is scheduled for 25th June 21:00 UTC. Ed	edcheetham	Fri May 16 13:56:47 Z 2014	post10091	topc6715

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 23th January 2013, 21:00 - 23:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc5426)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 23th January 2013, 21:00 - 23:00 UTC	Dear all Here are the details of the call for 23rd January 21:00 UTC: Agenda: 1. Discussion and improvement to X with Y proposal document [doc7179] - including heuristics for determining 'exceptions' 2. Discuss/demonstrate allergy data in production environment and consider other disorder/manifestation patterns in the context of the allergy approach. Conference call [dial-in details at [doc6192]): IHTSDO Line; #3 Passcode: 54362 GoToMeeting: Meeting ID: 449-925-953 https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/449925953 Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Jan 23 10:09:45 Z 2013	post7906	topc5426
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 23th January 2013, 21:00 - 23:00 UTC	Notes from ECE call 23rd January 2013 Present on call: Ed Cheetham Bruce Goldberg Rob Hausam Paul Amos Main topic of discussion focussed on the X with Y position document. Changes made included moving the examples into the early part of the document, and modifying a couple of the examples themselves (revision posted to [doc7179]. There is still a need to illustrate the X with Y with Z patterns (they happen so they need to be understood), and also a need to consider the 'failing cases' for pattern 3. Placeholders in V2 of the document but not fixed yet. Note added referencing a paper which indicates that surgically treated diabetes can be followed some time later with manifestations of diabetic retinopathy (i.e. due_to but not concurrent). Plans to discuss the allergy data in the current production environment were thwarted by technical factors - carry over to next call. Many thanks to Rob and Bruce for their heroic efforts to address this. An incidental finding was noted regarding (a) a partial separation of ‘entire’ allergenic trigger from the epitope part and (b) where this separation is made, a disconnect between specifically-named entire trigger and the allergen part. Specifically, we have ‘entire tree and shrub pollen’ defining the corresponding allergy and playing the role of ‘plant material’, and a separate ‘tree and shrub pollen allergen’ playing the ‘pollen allergen’ role. The concerning aspect of this latter class is that it is NOT a subtype/explicit part of ‘tree and shrub pollen’, so its use in allergy expressions would not necessarily result in predictable/sensitive detection of patients with ‘tree pollen allergy’ using SNOMED CT-based inferencing. Actions - Ed to update X with Y document. Ed / Rob to ensure there is a suitable technical environment for workbench demonstration on the call. Paul - to follow up with Kent/Substance project regarding the allergen issue. Next call Wednesday February 6th 2013 21:00 UTC for 2 hours Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Thu Jan 31 15:53:30 Z 2013	post7963	topc5426

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday August 28th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours (collabnet topic id: topc6084)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday August 28th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Dear all We have an ECE project call on Wednesday August 28th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours Agenda: Update on progress on near and medium-term actions from last call: Near-term actions: Ed - rework obs testing plan for X with Y, reconciliation of other changes All - continued review of 4th test set [doc8565: XwithYSyndrome20130710.xlsx] Bruce - discuss posting [topc6036] on "...possible models for pseudaollergy and analysis of deleting the due to allergic reaction attribute value pair from allergic conditions..." Progress review of medium-term actions: Bruce - update on discussing aspirational allergy model with Stefan Paul - produce fast track project document for pollen allergen issue Ed - progress note for content committee Ed/all - agenda for Washington / who's going to be there. GoToMeeting details are: Meeting ID: 692-600-464 https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/692600464 Telephony will be VoIP only Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Aug 27 15:59:39 Z 2013	post8872	topc6084
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday August 28th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Notes from call: Present on call Ed Cheetham Bruce Goldberg Rob Hausam Paul Amos Main points of note. As per the agenda, the group discussed Bruce's reports at[topc6036] on "...possible models for pseudaollergy and analysis of deleting the due to allergic reaction attribute value pair from allergic conditions...". The main output of this was (near total!) agreement that the preferred formal definition of Pseudoallergy was: Define Pseudoallergy to substance as: \|Pseudoallergic disposition\| RG: {\|after\|=\|pseudoallergic reaction\| \|causative agent\|=\|substance\|} It was felt that this was isomorphic with the allergy approach, and used the same mechanism to distance the 'causative agent' relationship from the disposition class (recognising that an aspirational 'agent of realisation' role would be superior). The group discussed the changes made to the data as a result of deleting the due to allergic reaction attribute from allergic conditions, and discussed the draft report to the content committee. Further discussion on the agenda for Washington meeting, and concern was raised with regard to the number of testers available for the X with Y testing. Next call 11th September 2013 21:00 UTC for 90 mins. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Sep 10 15:53:12 Z 2013	post8967	topc6084

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 14th November 2012 21:00 UTC [please note time] (collabnet topic id: topc5204)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 14th November 2012 21:00 UTC [please note time]	Dear all We have a project group call booked for Wednesday 14th November (to follow Content Committee call). Topics for discussion: Planning 2013 - allergy and X with Y topics. Conference call: Line; #3 Passcode: 54362 (Dial in numbers at [doc6192]) GoToMeeting: Meeting ID: 874-173-728 https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/874173728 Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Nov 13 16:44:27 Z 2012	post7578	topc5204
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 14th November 2012 21:00 UTC [please note time]	Notes from call 20121114: Present on call: Kent Spackman Stefan Schulz Rob Hausam Bruce Goldberg Ed Cheetham Topics discussed: (1) The allergy-relevant draft January 2013 data was inspected and discussed. Two main issues identified: The use of the pathological process=allergic process (qualifier value) defining role had proved useful in curation of a number of allergic disorders, notably in reorganising them as descendants of 421095001 \| Allergic disorder by body site affected (disorder). Considerable discussion regarding the merits and validity of using the pathological process attribute to define the allergy concepts. Matters arising included: i. what does 'allergy process' mean in the sense of what are its specialisations? Since it currently has a single specialisation (allergic sensitisation process) this would suggest that 'allergy process' includes at least this meaning plus downstream allergic manifestational processes. ii. what do the various 'process' qualifier values mean (descendants of 308489006 \| Pathological process (qualifier value)) - in the context of process classes elsewhere in SNOMED CT (existing and anticipated 'manifestation/process' classes). A seemingly workable reinterpretation of the qualifier value concepts would be to think of them as 'types'/'process profiles'/'continuant qualities' - depending on the classes to which they are applied. Such an interpretation would not fully satisfy a strict ontological critique, but would indicate a recognition of current ontological class distinctions, without requiring a proliferation of values. Instead it may be better for the inherent ambiguity required by 'condition' classes to propagate into referenced qualifier values - disambiguation becoming possible when the condition/head codes are committed to particular S,D or P classes. iii. Name changes. Stefan suggested that in order to pull the data in line with point ii, the pathological process role name may benefit from change (various phrases made up of the following words were floated on the call: pathophysiological/origin/mechanism/type - to be decided). In addition, there would be merit in removing 'process' from a number of the FSN's - thus freeing up each qualifier value concept to be interpreted as a descriptor of each concept to which it refers, rather than requiring it to be the process itself. (2) Early discussions to kick off the X with Y work for 2013. Stefan suggested that the group include the production of definitions/scope notes for relevant classes as a routine. RF2 data makes their distribution more mainstream, and they should perform a useful role in making the proposals understandable. Bruce keen to concentrate on actual editing experience for the various modelling approaches. A full 'situation' modelling approach does not sound realistic - a 'situation interpretation' of a modelling approach similar to that used currently sounds more plausible [if we are to avoid dramatically changing the product]. To do: Bruce to identify a few new examples - which we will work through on the next call. All - to consider the renaming of pathological process All - to consider the temporal extensions to the due to relationship (as discussed in Stockholm) Next call - 28th November 21:00 UTC - X with Y topic plus (hopefully) presentation from Paul Amos on diabetes complications inception work. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Nov 16 15:52:19 Z 2012	post7592	topc5204

IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 23rd March 2011 - 20:00 UTC. (collabnet topic id: topc2927)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 23rd March 2011 - 20:00 UTC.	Dear all We have a project call on Wednesday March 23rd 20:00-22:00 UTC. Draft agenda: [I have basically rolled over the agenda from last time - apols again, but the GoToMeeting is new!] Note any associations added below which may be relevant. (1) brief project recap & feedback on ECE/observables discussion (2) allergy/allergic reaction model discussion (Bruce) (3) ectopic/accessory body structures (Ed/Penny if available) [(4) explanation/discussion on combined concepts note (Ed)] Call Instructions – Usual IHTSDO call instructions (attached), Line #2 Passcode 54362# Desktop Sharing GoToMeeting ID: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/357007552 Meeting ID: 357-007-552 Comments welcome. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Mar 22 16:45:33 Z 2011	post4004	topc2927
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 23rd March 2011 - 20:00 UTC.	Dear all Here are some brief notes from the ECE call 2011-03-23, and suggested date for next call (20th April): Present on call: Kent Spackman Bruce Goldberg Cathy Richardson Ed Cheetham Items discussed [associations referenced in square brackets found at bottom of posting]. (1) Ed briefly recapped the topics known to be in-scope for the project ('one code or more' + BFO-directed solution pattern, X with/without Y, structures/disordered structures), and reported on the discussions between ECE members and Daniel Karlsson regarding anticipated areas of overlap/interaction between the ECE project and the observables project. (2) Kent presented his recently-posted slides [post3993 below] which consider the ECE/observables interactions. Headline points include: It is proposed that it might be possible to distinguish those findings represented using the 'condition' approach (emerging in ECE discussions) from observation results, which would be value-carrying observations, defined in terms of the quality/property observed, and in terms of techniques and informants (i.e. 'requiring an observation/observer'). This approach has been illustratively tested against a number of the 'precoordination roadmap' patterns. Such an approach may be valuable for representing a large number of observation result findings (and relating them to their notionally 'unobserved' condition counterparts), however this will require further work to resolve issues such as: Property vs. observation result value boundary (see ataxic gait example - how should ataxic gait be distributed across the obs result, and also referenced as a condition?) Presence/absence/normality distribution. A family of abnormality patterns is suggested on slide 32 (with the possibility of invoking negation to represent 'normality'), whilst slides 27/28 provides an alternative pattern for representing a form of 'normal' screening result. (3) Ed briefly demonstrated a mechanism for, and the possible value of, navigational re-approximation of 'situation' concepts as 'subtypes' of their associated finding targets [in post3681 attachment]. In particular, this may be of value in attenuating the impact (on current SNOMED CT users) of adopting modelling approaches to X with/without Y patterns which would structurally separate such concepts from each X concept. Appropriately tailored and used, such an approach might allow a gradual (but progressively significant) remodelling of various combination patterns to take place, while preserving familiar (if logically inconsistent) views on the data. (4) Has_definitional_manifestation discussion. Ed presented a number of concerns regarding the relevance and suitability of the current use of the 'has_definitional_manifestation' relationship [in post3681 attachment]. Whilst a view was expressed that definitional circularity might not be such a big issue, there may be value in keeping 'has_definitional_manifestation' assertions as one layer of 'useful clinical associations', but actually crafting formal condition definitions in terms of the manifesting pathological processes. Next call. It was suggested by those present that the next call should be April 20th 20:00 UTC (first Wednesday/Thursday after April IHTSDO conference). Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon Mar 28 13:21:46 Z 2011	post4020	topc2927

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call 11th April 2012 21:00-22:00 UTC [PLEASE NOTE TIME] (collabnet topic id: topc4448)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call 11th April 2012 21:00-22:00 UTC [PLEASE NOTE TIME]	Dear all Our next planned call is scheduled forWednesday April 2012 21:00-22:00 UTC Please note the time - this is an hour later than our usual start as there is a Content Committee call beforehand. The main intention is to progress the X with Y topic: Supporting posts include: a. Use cases (including Bruce's updated version) are at [doc5469] b. Bruce's draft inception document ('X with Y, X due to Y' is at [topc4223].) c. Details of last X with Y call at [post6297] and more recently: d. Conditions vs. Situation discussion thread [topc4412] The tighter timescale will probably prevent us from dwelling on the last call [topc4407] but we can review this in two week's time. Call: IHTSDO Line: 4 (Dial in numbers at [doc4950]) Passcode: 54362# GoToMeeting - to follow Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Sat Apr 07 05:50:51 Z 2012	post6480	topc4448
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call 11th April 2012 21:00-22:00 UTC [PLEASE NOTE TIME]	Here are the GoToMeeting details: Meeting ID: 486-740-993 https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/486740993 Ed	edcheetham	Wed Apr 11 20:08:08 Z 2012	post6495	topc4448
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call 11th April 2012 21:00-22:00 UTC [PLEASE NOTE TIME]	Notes from ECE call 11th April 2012 present on call: Jon Patrick Stefan Schulz Kent Spackman Bruce Goldberg Rob Hausam Ed Cheetham The call was limited to an hour because of the preceding content committee call. The main topic of discussion was intended to be the 'X with Y' topic, but most of the time was occupied discussing the precursor topic, highlighted in work by the WHO-IHTSDO JAG, of how to interpret SNOMED CT finding/disorder concepts. The emergent theme in the manuscript at post6424 and restated in the thread below it that: SNOMED CT disorder concepts denote 'Clinical situations which include one or more conditions', where: Situations are phases of a patient’s life, during which he/she is bearer of (some combination of) [pathological] conditions and Conditions are body processes, states, dispositions, or (patho-) anatomical structures, which are reportable in the context of medical records. Several examples discussed, and several novel challenges identified: - [from the paper] "...the challenge of developing a SNOMED CT representation for conditions, and rules for determining when codes for conditions are pre-coordinated into the terminology...". To date this appears to have been straightforward (naming conditions as descendants of the S or D or P disjunction), but this is now complicated by these descendants being re-cast as 'situations'. - Aligning the 'includes' mechanism with the current 'associated finding and finding context' mechanisms for explicit context situations. - Representing negation and uncertainty; simple negation less of a problem; uncertainty ? not in scope for terminology (tho' I find this hard to accept). - Accomodating (but also distinguishing) 'observation results' as particular kinds of situation. Notably those observations which necessarily involve particular detection or evaluation modalities. - Representing causation or temporal association in situations. - Representing compound/additive conditions (multiple includes vs. single includes plus multiple 'has part'). Actions - Ed to prepare presentation for Content Committee to feed back progress. Next call - 25th April @ 20:00 UTC. May be problematic since it coincides with the IHTSDO conference final evening, but hopefully will allow for a bit of 'catch-up' if few can attend. If not then it's another 'allergy/allergic disorder' themed call. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Apr 13 15:03:25 Z 2012	post6503	topc4448

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 9th January 2013, 21:00 - 23:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc5382)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 9th January 2013, 21:00 - 23:00 UTC	Dear all Please find below the dial-in and GoToMeeting details for the first 2013 ECE call. I hope that we can work further on sample X with Y data [topc5209] and [post7643], with consideration of Bruce's thoughts on causality [topc5333] I'm also keen to see if we can nail down an answer to Rob H's question "...[can we]...more or less summarize where we are currently with the finding/disorder discussion and the current conclusions/recommendations?" In addition I would like to discuss the X with Y morphologic abnormality topic [post7772 et. seq.]. Kind regards Ed Conference call: IHTSDO Line; #1 (Dial in numbers at [doc6192]) Passcode: 54362 GoToMeeting: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/839669992 Meeting ID: 839-669-992	edcheetham	Tue Jan 08 22:25:43 Z 2013	post7846	topc5382
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 9th January 2013, 21:00 - 23:00 UTC	Notes from call: Present on call: Rob Hausam Bruce Goldberg Ed Cheetham Apologies: Stefan Schulz Paul Amos Main topics discussed: Further detailed discussion on a number of examples worked through regarding the suitability of available patterns. Some additional discussion regarding the (albeit rare) requirement to represent: 237670000 \| ACTH hypersecretion not causing Cushing's syndrome - does this term imply that Cushing's syndrome is present (along with the ACTH+ but not caused by it), or does it imply that Cushings syndrome is not present, despite the ACTH+? Rob particularly uncomfortable with the property of pattern 1 [C representing 'A due to B' modelled as: C: IsA A, IsA B, Due_to B] suggesting that C IsA B and is also due_to B (i.e. C's B-ness is somehow due to itself). Probably excusable in a situation interpretation, but might need some careful use of role grouping to prevent some weird inference. Some additional discussion regarding combined morphologic abnormality concepts, and whether A with B morphology concepts can be treated and defined as logical conjunctions). No hard conclusions, but general agreement that such an approach might be suitable for some areas of morphology content. Plans: Based on a strong feeling that Pattern 3 [C representing 'A due to B' modelled as: C: IsA A, Due_to B] should be the default approach to modelling (as it often currently is), and that what is now needed is a clearer heuristic for determining what features should result in the use of a multiple IsA (or even Pattern 1) approach. Ed to put together single page proposal document to be discussed at next meeting. Also plan to discuss allergy data in production environment and consider other disorder patterns in the context of the allergy approach. Next call Wed 23rd January 2013 @21:00 UTC Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Thu Jan 17 16:48:37 Z 2013	post7873	topc5382
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 9th January 2013, 21:00 - 23:00 UTC	X with Y proposal document posted here [doc7179] - slightly later than intended, but hopefully in time for next week's call - details to follow. Ed	edcheetham	Fri Jan 18 16:15:54 Z 2013	post7891	topc5382

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Call Wednesday 10th September 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours (collabnet topic id: topc7125)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Call Wednesday 10th September 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Dear all We have an ECE conference call planned for 10th September 21:00 UTC. We have one more item of our X with Y homework to discuss (Fetus with damage due to intrauterine contraceptive device) - the last item in: Bruce [post10413] Yong [post10409] Ed [post10411] I understand that Yong will be unable to make this call, but it would still be good to discuss this last item. Bruce may wish to point out the salient modifications in his Elaboration phase document for X with Y project [post10523] In addition we need to plan the content of the face-to-face meeting in Amsterdam next month (including joint session with mapping and implementation SIGs). [We must also not forget Jim's question from last time...[post10457]...but I suspect that we will have to defer this week. GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon Sep 08 16:03:20 Z 2014	post10540	topc7125
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Call Wednesday 10th September 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Notes from call: Present on call Ed Cheetham Bruce Goldberg Stefan Schulz Paul Amos Rob Hausam Yongsheng Gao Main topics discussed. Principal discussions were focussed on: (1) Residual issues regarding 'calculi'. Current situation already observed - that calculus-related conditions can be represented using the body substance (the calculus 'object') as well as the morphologic abnormality. No detectable distinction between events/processes (e.g. obstruction with calculus) and the disposition to form calculi. Possible that this concern applies to similar 'countable' phenomena such as thrombo-emboli, but current data suggests that calculi are the only disorders treated this way. We had concluded that a sensible approach to XYZ decomposition was to treat 'countable' phenomena such as this as we had done those events where the 'means of introduction' was significant or pathologically macroscopic (recourse to due_to or after a disorder or event rather than Causative_agent = substance). Stefan offered an extension to this, being the distinction between an "...external cause such as a shrapnel, which causes the damage at the very moment where it enters the body, and on the other hand a parasite, which grows inside the body and eventually causes a complication like intestinal obstruction or destruction of organs." (2) Prolonged discussion regarding fifth complex example "Fetus with damage due to intrauterine contraceptive device with antenatal problem (disorder)" Main issue related to a potential corruption of the intended semantics when these concepts were introduced to SNOMED CT from ICD 9/10. As worded the source term is prefixed "Maternal care for (suspected)...", suggesting that the true semantics may relate (a) to maternal care and (b) a degree of uncertainty (suspected). Perhaps this concept should be positioned beneath 200468004 \| Maternal care for fetus (disorder) [probably following an inactivation stage]. (3) Planning discussion for Amsterdam meeting: (a) Joint half session with Mapping and Implementation SIGs Monday 27th October Possibilities included: A recap of the 'interim' allergy (SDP) model applied to the current data, as well as a description of the aspirational model - value: explain to all parties how each of the allergy-related classes is represented (and inter-related). [Bruce Goldberg happy to do this] A recap of the HL7 patient care designs for allergy representation. Value: explanation to all parties as to how SNOMED CT content will fit into one of the candidate information model designs. [Rob Hausam happy to do this] (b) Project group session Tuesday 28th October Planned content will be a mixture of X with Y simple and X with Y complex: X with Y complex Presentation on identified patterns [Yong, building on existing work] Worked examples [Bruce to provide examples, all present to do (probably in groups of 3), with wash-up and comparison with patterns to test completeness/frequency/reliability etc.] X with Y simple Review of adequacy of X with Y materials and processes for actual modellers [Ed] Review of progress applying X with Y guidance (including new elaboration doc.) to diabetes work [Paul Amos] (4) Inconclusive discussions on compounded morphology (e.g. "chronic bleeding ulcer" and "displaced comminuted fracture". Ed to share some examples with Stefan to experiment with Owl model. Next call: Agreement that we can have a bit of a break until the October meeting. We have, however, planned a call for 15th October 21:00 UTC as a 'checkpoint' prior to Amsterdam. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon Sep 22 14:20:17 Z 2014	post10593	topc7125

IHTSDO ECE PG: Stockholm face-to-face meeting 23--24th October 2012 (collabnet topic id: topc5130)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Stockholm face-to-face meeting 23/24th October 2012	Dear all The Event, Condition and Episode project group has two half day meetings next week at the IHTSDO conference in Stockholm: Tuesday 23rd October 2012, 13:30-17:00 [11:30 UTC] - allergy topic Wednesday 24th October 2012, 09:00-12:30 [07:00 UTC] - X with Y topic Please find uploaded here [doc6520] the draft agenda. Details are subject to change, but I hope that the spirit will stay constant. I shall not be able to attend in person, but hope to be present via dial-in/GoToMeeting - details of these to follow. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Oct 17 11:25:54 Z 2012	post7473	topc5130
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Stockholm face-to-face meeting 23/24th October 2012	Dear all To confirm for the Tuesday meeting: Dial in: IHTSDO line number 3 Passcode: 54362# (Dial in numbers at [doc6192]) GoToMeeting ID: 293-021-793 https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/293021793 Agenda updated at [doc6520]. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon Oct 22 19:59:15 Z 2012	post7487	topc5130
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Stockholm face-to-face meeting 23/24th October 2012	Dear all Many thanks for your valuable participation today. To confirm for the Wednesday meeting: Dial in: IHTSDO line number 3 Passcode: 54362# (Dial in numbers at [doc6192]) GoToMeeting ID: 761-298-072 https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/761298072 I note that the start time is now 09:30 local (Stockholm) time (I had previously said 09:00 because that was on the published schedule). Agenda updated at [doc6520]. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Oct 23 16:15:35 Z 2012	post7489	topc5130
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Stockholm face-to-face meeting 23/24th October 2012	Dear all Many thanks to those who participated in these two half-day meetings, in particular thanks to Bruce and Stefan for all their presentation work. Bruce and I have arranged a call tomorrow - see subsequent posting - in order to clarify the details and conclusions coming out of the meeting, and all are welcome to attend. the bullet point summary which was presented back to the plenary was: - Phase 1 allergy proposal widely accepted by discussion group – some fine tuning required prior to inclusion in January 2013 data. - Wider (and non-disruptive) incorporation of SDP proposal still requires more work and understanding, but appears to address trade-off requirements between clarity and precision (when required) and managed ambiguity when precision not needed or not available. - Gradual synthesis of ‘situation interpretation’ and association role hierarchy refinement progressing for ‘X with/due to/after Y’ compound concepts. Decision to investigate sub-roles supporting explicit temporal inclusion/exclusion. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Oct 30 12:30:05 Z 2012	post7528	topc5130
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Stockholm face-to-face meeting 23/24th October 2012	Notes from Stockholm meetings: In attendance: 23rd October: Bruce Goldberg Penni Hernandez Amy Wang Rob Hausam Peter Hendler Catalina Martinez Costa Asrulreezal Abdul Wahab Jim Case Paul Amos Stefan Schulz Ed Cheetham (phone) 24th October: Paul Amos Jim Case Howard Goldberg Rob Hausam Catalina Martinez Costa Elze de Groot Roberta Severin Bruce Goldberg Amy Wang Daniel Karlsson Kent Spackman Ed Cheetham (phone) Main topics discussed and outcomes: 23rd October Bruce presented a detailed account of the background to, and the proposals made, for the interim and longer term allergy models. Still some concern expressed regarding the value of distinguishing processes from structures (comfort that the disposition version of allergy is distinct). The current proposal - including that discussed in the later 'testing of scalable representations...' topic does not force the distinction to be made, but provides expressive freedom if required. Concern also expressed regarding the introduction of an 'allergy condition' class - this should be mitigated by careful use of textual definitions/scope notes. Ed presented earlier work on testing the 'scalable representations' paper proposal. Stefan pointed out some fundamental misunderstandings in the class correspondences used ('morphological abnormality' should correspond to abnormal structure, not 'disorder'). General agreement that the short-term fix for resolving duplicates was not ideal (results in bizarre reversal of 'finding/disorder' relationships), but also agreement that a workable interim solution is needed - the number of changes for a 'big bang' incorporation of the SDP classes would be prohibitive between two releases, so will have to be gradual. 24th October Bruce and Stefan presented excellent background materials for both the X with Y topic and the 'situation interpretation' of combination concepts. Highlights & feedback to Community of Practice: - Phase 1 allergy proposal widely accepted by discussion group – some fine tuning required prior to inclusion in January 2013 data. - Wider (and non-disruptive) incorporation of SDP proposal still requires more work and understanding, but appears to address trade-off requirements between clarity and precision (when required) and managed ambiguity when precision not needed or not available. - Gradual synthesis of ‘situation interpretation’ and association role hierarchy refinement progressing for ‘X with/ due to/after Y’ compound concepts. Decision to investigate sub-roles supporting explicit temporal inclusion/exclusion. Ed	edcheetham	Tue Nov 13 16:45:26 Z 2012	post7579	topc5130

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday August 14th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours [to follow content committee] (collabnet topic id: topc6035)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday August 14th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours [to follow content committee]	Dear all We have an ECE project call on Wednesday August 14th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours Agenda: Update on progress on near and medium-term actions from last call: Near-term actions: Ed - Extend patterns document to include 'causative agent' pattern and introduce putative 'process' section Ed - read and rework obs testing plan for X with Y Bruce - Extend patterns document to include 'after' pattern Ed - outline timetable for testing. All - undertake testing of 4th test set [doc8565: XwithYSyndrome20130710.xlsx] prior to next meeting 14th August ideally according to above timetable. Medium-term actions Bruce - dust off aspirational allergy etc. model and discuss with Stefan Paul - produce fast track project document for pollen allergen issue. Bruce - consider impact of removing residual due to=allergic reaction / has definitional manifestation Bruce - consider options for pseudoallergy / substances which can both provoke allergy and pseudoallergy. GoToMeeting details: To follow (just noticed I haven't yet been sent the citrix invitation...) As before, I will set this call up for us to use the GoToMeeting VoIP. However, just, in case, I have also arranged for an IHTSDO conference line. Conference call [dial-in details at [doc7837]): Line: Line no 2 Passcode: 54362# Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Aug 13 16:41:45 Z 2013	post8806	topc6035
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday August 14th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours [to follow content committee]	As promised, here are the GoToMeeting details: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/610464088 Meeting ID: 610-464-088 "You will be connected to audio using your computer's microphone and speakers (VoIP). A headset is recommended." Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Aug 14 09:52:17 Z 2013	post8809	topc6035
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday August 14th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours [to follow content committee]	ECE project call Wednesday August 14th 2013 Brief minutes from call Bruce Goldberg Ed Cheetham Rob Hausam Paul Amos Main topics discussed: Revised sections of document: Bruce presented his revision to inclue an 'after' section and Ed the section on 'causative agent'. Stefan had reordered the sections in order to make reading easier (in particular moving the "Notes on deciding between patterns 2 and 3" section to the end) - plan to move the 'after' section back into the body of the document. Some time spent reviewing the fourth round of test exercise. - continue this on the next call. Insufficient time to review documents at topc6036 - continue this on the next call. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Aug 28 15:16:24 Z 2013	post8883	topc6035

IHTSDO ECE PG: Project call 14th March 2012 21:00-23:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc4358)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Project call 14th March 2012 21:00-23:00 UTC	Dear all The next ECE call is scheduled for 14th March 2012 21:00-23:00 UTC NOTE: Note Daylight saving times begin around now, e.g. USA, Canada Clocks begin Daylight Saving Time on 11 March 2012 at 2am local time, and UK / Europe: Clocks begin Daylight Saving Time on Sunday 25 March 2012 01:00 GMT. Call: IHTSDO Line: 4 (Dial in numbers at [doc4950]) Passcode: 54362# GoToMeeting: Meeting ID: 540-316-289 https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/540316289 'Agenda'... Hopefully discussion will concentrate on describing a plausible & practical mechanism for disambiguation of descendants of SDP disjunction concepts in the allergy proposal. In particular the proposal relies on the publication of wilflully ambigous content which might be processes, disordered structures or dispositions. They may be committed to the record in this ambigous form, but if it is desirable to remove the ambiguity (to create a precise 'process', 'structure' or 'disposition' statement), what is an acceptable mechanism look like? Details of the last 'allergy topic' call can be found at post6239. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Mar 09 16:45:23 Z 2012	post6348	topc4358
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Project call 14th March 2012 21:00-23:00 UTC	Notes from ECE call 2012-03-14 (Allergy topic) Present on call: Kent Spackman Bruce Goldberg Rob Hausam Ed Cheetham Apologies Stefan Schulz Topics discussed: (1) Follow-up on last call regarding X with Y Minutes reviewed. Bruce pointed out that he had already provided additional examples on the X with Y use case slide set (thanks!). Bruce also clarified that the ICD->SNOMED CT mapping direction was as intended, but in use would then reverse (SNOMED CT->ICD) for analysis purposes. Keen to keep this evolving, as it will provide useful content upon which to test candidate solutions. (2) Discussion on Allergy topic. Main discussion concentrated on exploring a recommended mechanism for 'data input time' specialisation of either uncommitted 'conditions' to their 'disposition' or 'structure/process' variants, and likewise further specialisation of uncommitted 'structure/processes' concepts. Two main options discussed: Concept combination ('adding an IsA'): Rhinitis (condition) would be recorded as Rhinitis AND Disposition to mean 'propensity to "suffer from rhinitis"', and Rhinitis AND 'Structure/process' to mean '"active rhinitis" ongoing'. Pros - economical/minimalist approach technically. Cons - possibly unfamiliar pattern of 'post-coordination' (tho could be emulated by IsA=Disposition 'refinement' pattern). Refinement using defining properties of each specialisation class: Rhinitis (condition) would be recorded as Rhinitis AND SomeRole=SomeValue to mean 'propensity to "suffer from rhinitis"', and Rhinitis AND SomeOtherRole=SomeOtherValue' to mean '"active rhinitis" ongoing'. Pros - more familiar 'refinement' approach to post-coordination Cons - need to identify distinct role defining features for each class. In particular this could be problematic for dispositions, since they either/both 'inhere in' a structure and/or 'are realised as' a process. Current SNOMED CT DL won't support the required optionality - 'multiple sufficient definitions' - tho' such requirements are met by additional expressivity features such as GCI. Based on discussions the 'concept combination' approach seemed more attractive, but still requires more work to identify just how it would be introduced. Both approaches need further description (e.g. on whether there are any display name variations required, and whether there are information model alternative strategies for achieving the same semantic intent. Subsidiary/secondary discussion: Certainly for allergy topic, the feeling was that it is frequently difficult to distinguish between process and structure statements: We should probably be asking 'does it matter'. For clinical documentation (whether describing patients or specimens) the distinction is frequently artificial; referring to the process or the structural consequence of the process is deeply ingrained in classical clinical language; whilst there are exceptions, a significant number of structures - even if they also have a distinct 'structure' name - share a label with the antecedent/formative process, e.g. Coarctation, Concretion, Laceration, Vegetation. There may be use cases (perhaps e.g. indexing academic papers where a 'clinical situation' cannot be assumed) where the distinction between the process and the structure was more critical, but to date there has not been a compelling justification for separating out representations of morphologically abnormal structures and the antecedent processes. Currently the nearest to this is the distinct 'pathological process' attribute in SNOMED CT, where the (tiny) set of values are permitted because "...the results of that process are not structural...". Action. Bruce to tidy up the visio class diagram worked on during the meeting and repost. Ed - to arrange the next couple of calls. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon Mar 19 13:36:13 Z 2012	post6378	topc4358

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 7th September 2011 - 20:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc3656)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 7th September 2011 - 20:00 UTC	We have a project call on Wednesday 7th September 2011 - 20:00-22:00 UTC Draft agenda: (1) brief recap of 17th August call (2) MAIN TOPIC discussion & elaboration of use cases - comparison document posted [doc4432] - see below for explanation (3) planning for Sydney face-to-face meeting. Call Instructions: Usual IHTSDO call instructions [doc3360] Line #2 Passcode 54362# Desktop Sharing GoToMeeting ID: Meeting ID: 284-255-728 https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/284255728 note - the use case document is an attempt to align the list of use cases we have previously identified (after stepping back from the potentially inward-looking exercise of data modelling) with a number of information modelling use cases developed by (and under discussion by HL7 patient care). the introductory section of the document explains some of the differences (perhaps fewer than I had expected), and then the table tries to identify the similarities. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Sep 06 09:56:16 Z 2011	post5206	topc3656
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 7th September 2011 - 20:00 UTC	Brief notes from call 9th September Present on call Ed Cheetham Bruce Goldberg Stefan Schulz Main topics discussed: (1) Review of metonymy issue (as it relates to allergens/more generally). Stefan keen to advance this discussion in due course - note sent to Jon Patrick (2) Review of Stefan's suggested modifications to draft model, notably introduction of nested 'bearerOf some AllergicDisposition' to definition of AllergicSensitisation. Additional discussion suggested that AllergicReaction definition would benefit from inclusion of "and (isRealizationOf some AllergicDisposition)". (3) Consideration of stated use cases. Draft model compared with outline use cases i-v. Pattern ii (recording more specific 'allergy to X specialised by manifestation pattern') has previously been discussed as supporting a need to describe particular disease classes (perhaps comparable to discriminating between "grand mal" and "petit mal" epilepsy), however it was felt that this may be a false requirement - many patients with an allergy which characteristically manifests as urticaria will change their manifestation over time. Better therefore to discourage direct support for this pattern. Well-documented concerns regarding adequacy of SNOMED CT mechanism for representing uncertainty and negation, however it would seem appropriate to cite this mechanism for representing 'no allergies/no allergy to x' and 'possible allergy' in proposal. Plan for next meeting - continue discussing allergy use cases and compare with features of model proposal. Suggestion from BG post call: add use case: vi. recording more specific allergic reaction to x specialized by manifestion pattern - example: Anaphylactic reaction to milk Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Sep 20 14:06:32 Z 2011	post5325	topc3656

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Monday 13th July 20:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc7554)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Monday 13th July 20:00 UTC	Dear all We have a planned meeting of the ECE group on Monday 13th July @20:00 UTC. Hopefully we can (1) make progress on extending the allergy model to other disorders (rough outputs in the slide deck at [doc11966]), continuing to work through the KP 2500 list with rankings (2) In addition I would like to explore the following X with Y patterns and the current guidance: (a) X possibly caused by Y requests (e.g. 'injury possibly caused by substance use') (b) X associated Y where Y is a variable feature of X, and both are ultimately due to some other (possibly unstated) phenomenon (e.g. Serum sickness associated immune complex vasculitis) - ? simple co-occurrence. Both of these may actually be really easy, but (the first one in particular) may need a friendly amendment to the decision matrix - and in particular an extension to the scope of 'after' to cover (in addition) the 'overlaps' and 'starts' time categories. This would overload 'after' even further (and plainly ignores the 'possible causation' aspect) but has the benefit of inclusively saying 'X happened after Y (including possible overlap)' rather than rigidly requiring the non-overlap of 'after' currently. the cost of this would be to lose the 'situation definitely doesn't include Y' implication of 'after' at present. GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Jul 10 16:06:00 Z 2015	post11333	topc7554
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Monday 13th July 20:00 UTC	Notes from call 20170713 Present on call Bruce Goldberg Ed Cheetham Rob Hausam Penni Hernandez Stefan Schulz Daniel Karlsson Yongsheng Gao Paul Amos Topics discussed. The group thanked Stefan for his work in preparing the poster abstract for Uruguay, and for presenting the group's paper at ICBO. Main part of call spent discussing feasibility of SDP approach to non-allergy content. Proliferation of classes can be avoided if all are assumed initially to be 'conditions' (life phases including the conditions on the RHS of each role group) - then decision needs to be made for each setting where pre-existent SDP variants are found: how to treat each existing class and how to organise them. Not all dispositions have a corresponding process or abnormal structure. ? each process has a corresponding disposition, Example discussions - Temporal & causal uncertainty (possibly caused by, possibly overlaping with). For both examples, taken literally, there is reasonable concern that to attempt to represent 'possible' cause and temporal overlap is to slip back towards 'associated with'. It was agreed that this was not the intention of the discussion, but instead the emphasis was on whether restricting 'after' to non-overlap left a representational gap (no necessary causation, no necessary co-occurence but a significant sequencing - which may or may not include overlap). Possible benefit of considering 'after or overlaps with' as a temporally vague but causally silent role to meet this need. Attractiveness of 'X and history of Y' to emphasise non-overlap discussed - previously explored in one of Bruce's papers and not really practical given current data. Stefan offered to share (by email to those present) his recent papers on Clinical Situations / Clinical Life Phases (now done) as well as prepare a small illustrative OWL file. Next call (so as not to collide with Observables - 3rd August). Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Sun Aug 02 17:42:29 Z 2015	post11380	topc7554

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call - 9th May 20:00-22:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc4536)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call - 9th May 20:00-22:00 UTC	Dear all Please find below dial-in and GoToMeeting details for the ECE call today (9th May @ 20:00 hours). Discussion will be based around the allergy topic. I have spectacularly failed to follow up on either of my actions [project plan leading up to October for allergy topic, and note to ICD-JAG regarding role of ECE project group in disposition/condition work] - apologies. 1. I hope that we can work on the former during the call (perhaps Daniel's Observables Test Plan [doc5304] will provide some inspiration). 2. I hope to address the latter in a couple of hours. Anyway: Call details: Line: 2 (Dial in numbers at [doc4950]) Passcode: 54362# GoToMeeting details: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/650727241 Meeting ID: 650-727-241 Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed May 09 13:05:53 Z 2012	post6616	topc4536
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call - 9th May 20:00-22:00 UTC	Brief notes from the call: In attendance: Ed Cheetham Bruce Goldberg Apologies: Stefan Schulz Main topic discussed: Bruce presented a reworking/simplification of the allergy proposal ([post6617] and [post6621]- aspirational rather than 'interim' designs). Main features considered were: - The 'hasOutcome Some' relationship from allergic reaction -> allergic condition. - Questioning the allergic condition hasLocus some immune system structure (what did this really mean) - Exploring the integration of an 'allergy condition' class amongst related classes (disorders of immune structures, disorders of immune systems, autoimmune conditions, gammopathies...). Speculation regarding the value of applying the 'pathological process' defining approach to allergy concepts and other immune system disorders - seems to be in keeping with the intent of the attribute. To do: Still a need to plan next steps prior to October. Next call - May 23rd 20:00 UTC - Ed to book. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri May 11 14:55:21 Z 2012	post6637	topc4536

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 16th February 2011 - 20:00 UTC. (collabnet topic id: topc2814)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 16th February 2011 - 20:00 UTC.	Dear all We have a project call on Wednesday Feb 16th 20:00-22:00 UTC. Draft agenda: (1) brief project recap (2) allergy/allergic reaction model discussion (Bruce) (3) ectopic/accessory body structures (Ed/Penny if available) [(4) explanation/discussion on combined concepts note (Ed)] Call Instructions – Usual IHTSDO call instructions (attached), Line #2 Passcode 54362# Desktop Sharing GoToMeeting ID: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/641960385 Meeting ID: 641-960-385 Comments welcome. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon Feb 14 15:50:25 Z 2011	post3741	topc2814
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 16th February 2011 - 20:00 UTC.	Dear all Really sorry - got the wrong start time (1 hour out) - furious with myself. The desktop share is up in case anyone is available for the 21:00 UTC start, but if not we will reconvene for the March 16th call. Kind regards and apologies again. Ed	edcheetham	Wed Feb 16 20:57:03 Z 2011	post3756	topc2814

IHTSDO ECE PG: Project call 25th January 2012 21:00-23:00 UTC. (collabnet topic id: topc4222)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Project call 25th January 2012 21:00-23:00 UTC.	Dear all As discussed, the next ECE call is scheduled for 25th January at 21:00 UTC. The plan is to reinvigorate the group's discussions on the topic of 'combined concepts' (A associated with B, A due to B, A after B, A with B, A without B) and develop an acceptable interim and/or definitive representational solution. The line is already booked (Line #3 – password: 54362) and I will be assigned the GoToMeeting info nearer the time of the call. All (especially Bruce) feel free to upload any materials you would like us to consider before and discuss during the call itself. I'll see what I've got and post over the weekend. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Jan 20 13:04:23 Z 2012	post6092	topc4222
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Project call 25th January 2012 21:00-23:00 UTC.	Dear all Here are the GoToMeeting details for our call: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/725927248 Meeting ID: 725-927-248 Bruce has kindly posted his draft inception document ('X with Y, X due to Y' - [topc4223]) and this would seem like an excellent place to bootstrap project discussions on this area. There are some older presentations on the same topic in the 2009 zip file at [doc4899]. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Jan 25 15:04:14 Z 2012	post6105	topc4222
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Project call 25th January 2012 21:00-23:00 UTC.	And to recap the phone details: IHTSDO Line: 3 (Dial in numbers at [doc4950]) Passcode: 54362# Ed	edcheetham	Wed Jan 25 15:06:10 Z 2012	post6106	topc4222
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Project call 25th January 2012 21:00-23:00 UTC.	Dear all Many thanks to those who were able to attend last week's call Present on call Ed Cheetham Stefan Schulz Rob Hausam Kent Spackman Bruce Goldberg Apologies Jon Patrick Main topics discussed The main purpose of this call was to re-ignite discussions on the topic of representing X-with-Y (and all causative associations). Many thanks to Bruce for sharing his inception document on this topic to serve as a discussion focus and catalyst. Bruce suggested that there appear to be three perspectives on the problem of representing "combined concepts" in SNOMED CT: - Clarifying the nature of concepts in SNOMED CT (situations, realist class representations), the relationship between 'implicit' and 'explicit' context situations in SNOMED CT, and the use cases which must be satisfied by a 'combined concept' solution - Making sense of the labrynthine complexities of clinical language, in particular when used to achieve the following in single utterances/phrases: - refer to multiple/compound observations, activities and events - convey subtle blends of uncertainty, negation and causation between them - do so in a parsimonious way - Organising (e.g. hierarchically) the various types of causation and temporal association. Kent suggested that it would be sensible to try and deal with the first of these perspectives first - with approaches to the others hopefully clearer as a result. Many aspects of this subject discussed, but with no really confident direction of design emerging. Perhaps the strongest messages related to the similarities between this group's activities and that of the ICD11 JAG discussions on the ontological commitment of SNOMED CT - and the relationship between 'situations' and 'conditions' discussed elsewhere in this project and here: http://informatics.mayo.edu/WHO/ICD11/collaboratory/projects/situations-conditions/wiki Other points to note: The value of recasting 'role grouped relations' in disorders as 'includes' relations. Various examples discussed, and Stefan has kindly posted an example owl file called fallot.owl [post6119 - and reposted here] which shows, after classification, how treating the role grouped relations as 'includes'/'partonomic' realations avoids the unwanted tetralogy IsA pentalogy classification. NOTE - when I try and download this file it is renamed fallot.xml. Don't know why - the contents is unchanged. The non-ontological nature of most causative relations. Stefan explained that for strictly ontological purposes remarkably few causative assertions can be made. the only causative roles in BioTop are hasAgent and hasRealization. The vast number of other causative assertions (Bruce's paper lists a whole family of causality types) are vital for describing instances (phenomenon A observed to be caused by phenomenon B), but very few are truly 'defining'. Next steps: Bruce agreed that we could usea a 'branch' version of his inception document for this project's purposes - to provide a framework to capture the various design ideas and thoughts. A useful early step (given the ordering of the perspectives above) may be to try and collate the documenation and analysis use cases which are understood to be supported by representing combined concepts. Next calls: Allergy call - February 15th 21:00 UTC - review current allergy proposal, with concentration on relationship to the less scrutinised 'allergic disorder' components. Combined concept - February 29th 21:00 UTC - details TBA. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Feb 03 16:06:39 Z 2012	post6140	topc4222

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday June 26th 2013 21:00 - 22:30 UTC [to follow authors call] (collabnet topic id: topc5950)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday June 26th 2013 21:00 - 22:30 UTC [to follow authors call]	We have an ECE project call on Wednesday June 26th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours Agenda: 1. Review minutes of last call [post8656] 2. Review second phase X with Y materials [Test set at doc8451, output of my testing at doc8516] 3. If not dealt with in (1), further discussion on History of x (situation) and X disposition GoToMeeting details: Meeting ID: 627-495-833 https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/627495833 As before, I will set this call up for us to use the GoToMeeting VoIP. However, just, in case, I have also arranged for an IHTSDO conference line. Conference call [dial-in details at [doc7837]): Line: Line no 2 Passcode: 54362# Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Jun 25 14:14:58 Z 2013	post8676	topc5950
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday June 26th 2013 21:00 - 22:30 UTC [to follow authors call]	Notes from Call: Present on call: Bruce Goldberg Stefan Schulz Ed Cheetham Rob Hausam Apologies Paul Amos Main topics discussed: (1) X with Y examples Most of the call was occupied with reviewing/comparing Ed and Bruce's responses to the third phase of the X with Y reproducibility testing. Points of note: (i) crude mathematical comparison still looks like poor inter-rater variability (12/33 agreement), but on detailed review the differences are reduced (18/33). After discussion generally able to reach 'consensus' - perhaps this [multiple modeller plus conflict resolution] is the unavoidable spirit of modelling content of this sort? It may in fact be easier to describe a development approach based on detecting new content modelled using patterns 1, 2 or 3 and requiring another modeller to undertake independent testing/conflict resolution. (ii) further discussion on a preferred approach for in-scope 'named syndromes'. General agreement that they do yield to modelling using standard patterns - and for the most part there is no need to invoke less satisfactory 'multi-system' mechanisms for representation. (iii) Much discussion regarding a preferred structure for associating "congenital and chomosomally-named disorders" (as the dispositions) to their known chromosomal abnormalities. At present these are represented in a number of ways - most are organised beneath 74345006 \| Congenital disorder due to abnormality of chromosome number OR structure (disorder). Whist this Is_A relationship between the relevant congenital disorder and the corresponding chromosomal abnormality is 'true' (in the situation sense) it hides the causal (or bearer/disposition) relationship between the structural chromosomal abnormality/disorder and the resultant clinical picture/disposition. A handful of concepts carry an associated_with=chromosomal disorder relationship (e.g. content beneath 234632005 \| Immunodeficiency associated with chromosomal abnormality (disorder)), and perhaps there would be value in exploring this approach further as a general pattern. In terms of representing the actual chromosomal abnormalities, we considered the following options: (a) finding/disorder representations of the abnormality (e.g. isolating the content beneath 74345006 \| Congenital disorder due to abnormality of chromosome number OR structure (disorder) as being a description of the chromosomal abnormality (b) morphologic abnormality representations (e.g. the defects listed beneath 107675007 \| Chromosomal morphology (morphologic abnormality)) and sites beneath 312237004 \| Chromosome structure (cell structure) (c) a mixture of the two. Stefan suggested that option (a) was appealing in that it might provide an 'in-terminology' place to represent the results of chromosomal testing (defect type + named chromosome), and could be modelled in terms of the morphologic abnormality/chromosome structure values in (b). Clearly this would not provide an exhaustive or scalable mechanism for representing all chromosomal abnormalities and their associations with phenotypic manifestation, but perhaps describes what might be 'useful' in SNOMED CT. (2) Further discussion on history of x (situation) and X disposition General agreement that where the associated finding of a 'history of' concept is a disposition it is unclear what is really intended. For the most part dispositions do not 'resolve' so the idea that they occurred some time 'in the past' is difficult to comprehend. Of course there may be exceptions (diabetes in pregnancy or various drug-induced states), but for the most part the presence of 'history of' concepts is essentially a risk for redundant modelling. Actions: Bruce to raise a fast-track project description to suggest that all active 'history of disposition' (in particular allergy) concepts are inactivated as duplicate (or at least may_be_a) to their corresponding disposition targets. Ed to post another (4th) set of test examples [to doc8565]. Next call - Wednesday 10th July 2013 @ 20:30 UTC for 90 mins. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Jul 09 13:07:16 Z 2013	post8696	topc5950

IHTSDO ECE PG: Condition - Situation (collabnet topic id: topc4235)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Condition - Situation	I created an owl file called fallot.owl. It shows how e.g. Tetralogy of Fallot [Situation] is classified under Pulmonic Valve Stenosis [Situation]. However, it does not classify Pentalogy of Fallot [Situation] under Tetralogy of Fallot [Situation], because both Pentalogy of Fallot [Condition] and Tetralogy of Fallot [Condition] are primitive concepts in SNOMED CT. The reason that Pentalogy is a child of Tetralogy in SNOMED is due to a manually asserted IS-A link. Note that the "includes" relation corresponds to the "group" relation in SNOMED. Cheers, Stefan	sschulz	Sat Jan 28 15:47:04 Z 2012	post6119	topc4235

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Call 25th April 2012 20:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc4488)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Call 25th April 2012 20:00 UTC	Dear all Just a quick note to confirm that there will be a project call today 25th April 2012 @ 20:00 UTC. Given that it falls on the last evening of the IHTSDO Copenhagen meetings it is probably a foolish time to have one, but my main intention is for it to be a catch-up & planning meeting for Bruce and I, rather than a hard-thinking working meeting so don't worry if you can't make it. I also don't intend it to last much more than 1 hour. Topics to discuss: (1) check minutes of last call [post6503] (2) feedback from content committee presentation (3) outline planning of next 6 months (i) topics and goals (ii) meeting schedules (iii) annual leave planning Call: IHTSDO Line: 4 (Dial in numbers at [doc4950]) Passcode: 54362# GoToMeeting - to follow. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Apr 25 08:06:45 Z 2012	post6549	topc4488
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Call 25th April 2012 20:00 UTC	And here's the gotomeeting: Meeting ID: 682-255-256 https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/682255256 Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Apr 25 14:00:14 Z 2012	post6551	topc4488
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Call 25th April 2012 20:00 UTC	Many thanks to those who were able to attend this call: Present on the call Stefan Schulz Bruce Goldberg Ed Cheetham Rob Hausam Apologies Jon Patrick Main topics discussed: Reviewing Ed's slides presented to the Content Committee [doc5819] turned into quite a long discussion. Conclusion/impression was that the 'interim' approaches discussed regarding the representation of allergic reaction representation should be practicable. In particular Bruce's concern about how to represent the association between processes and other processes (or disjunction classes which might be processes) could be accommodated by an interpretation of: process has_outcome some process Equivalent to process 'precedes' some process and process has_outcome some disposition Equivalent to process has_outcome some structure bearer_of some disposition Stefan suggested that the current 'due_to' relationship (admittedly in the opposite direction as the above patterns) may be a simple interim approach. Planning up to Stockholm meeting in October: (1) intention to advance the allergic reaction/disorder work to a completed construction phase - Ed (& Bruce) to sketch out a project plan with this goal in mind. (2) Recognised dependency on the ICD11 JAG decision regarding situation/condition interpretation. Ed to send a note to Kent inquiring how best the ECE project group can help the JAG conclude this decision rather than undertake independent work. (3) Preference would be to have an all-day meeting in Stockholm [Ed may not be there, but time zones would allow remote attendance]. Ed to send a note to Kent / Sarah to help IHTSDO plan meeting. Next call - Allergy topic call 20:00 UTC 9th May 2012. Ed to set up Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Thu May 03 15:48:59 Z 2012	post6594	topc4488

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 6th March 2013, 21:00 - 23:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc5714)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 6th March 2013, 21:00 - 23:00 UTC	Dear all Here are the details of the call for 6th March 21:00 UTC: Agenda: 1. Consider further modifications (in particular Stefan's contribution) to X with Y proposal document [doc7179] 2. Discuss pseudoallergy proposal [documents at doc7386 & doc7387] 3. Update on "pollen and pollen allergen" proposal 4. Consider allergy to combination products +/- allergy discussion on SHRD project [topc5706] Conference call [dial-in details at [doc6192]): IHTSDO Line; #1 Passcode: 54362 GoToMeeting: Meeting ID: 381-600-161 https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/381600161 Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Mar 01 16:16:55 Z 2013	post8260	topc5714
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 6th March 2013, 21:00 - 23:00 UTC	For info we are trying gotomeeting voip: call details now: GoToMeeting 154-857-616 for desktop share AND telephony. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Mar 06 21:14:46 Z 2013	post8286	topc5714
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 6th March 2013, 21:00 - 23:00 UTC	Notes from call Present on call Bruce Goldberg Rob Hausam Paul Amos Stefan Schulz Ed Cheetham Main topics discussed (1) X with Y proposal document Stefan walked the group through his modifications to the X with Y document. Strong agreement that the document is now a good representation of the current X with Y thinking. Some specific discussion on the optimum interpretation of 78879009 \| intracranial hemorrhage following injury with open intracranial wound AND concussion (disorder). Stefan's original proposal saw this as a set of co-ocurrent situations, but others felt that there was a causal component (the unspecified 'injury') with a number of sequelae. Main conclusion was that it was time we started testing some example data against the identified patterns - predominantly to assess reproducibility of the approach. (2) Pseudoallergy Further discussion on the tension between representing 'good science' - the agreed aetological and manifestational distinctions between allergy and pseudoallergy - and publishing a terminology that is understandable. Ed remains concerned that having two different fundamental patterns between the two 'allergy types' (one using 'causative_agent', one using 'associated_with'), whilst this could be explained, may still require too much understanding of the product to be acceptable. Stefan wondered whether the 'after=sensitisation' pattern could be replicated for pseudoallergies (e.g. with some disjunct notion such as 'immune relevant exposure'), Actions Ed - to prepare an owl module based on example combination concepts for testing purposes Paul - to follow up on 'pollen allergen' topic Bruce - to continue testing modelling of pseudoallergy and allergy data to see if a coherent [revised document posted at post8288] Next call: Wednesday 20th March 2013 21:00 UTC. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Sat Mar 16 07:49:32 Z 2013	post8339	topc5714

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday November 20th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours (collabnet topic id: topc6261)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday November 20th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Dear all As planned, we have an ECE project call booked for 21:00 UTC on November 20th to follow the modellers' call. Topics to discuss include: - Follow-up on any actions of last call - Feedback and review of last round of X with Y testing work - Presentation of CliniClue automated Excel file for X with Y work. GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Nov 19 18:39:33 Z 2013	post9225	topc6261
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday November 20th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Quick minutes from call Present on call: Stefan Schulz Bruce Goldberg Ed Cheetham Apologies Paul Amos. Main part of call was spent reviewing the latest round of X with Y comparison work. Main concern was that the current comparison approach was too slow to complete within a single call. suggested refinement would be for a single reviewer to make an approximate judgement on initial comparison to try and highlight those where there was a significant difference of opinion. We shall try to do this for the next call (Ed to do), as well as re-review this set using such an approach. In addition, Ed presented a revised CliniClue API-enabled Excel spreadsheet (based on the XPloit sample files) which hopefully would speed up the review process. In order to minimise risk this was shared directly after the call with participants, however it may be of value (and open to improvement) if gradually shared more widely. The accompanying PowerPoint slide 'guidance notes' are posted here [doc9454]. Next call will be 21:00 UTC on 4th December 2013. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon Dec 02 16:13:06 Z 2013	post9257	topc6261

IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday February 12th 21:00 UTC for 1 hour (collabnet topic id: topc6465)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday February 12th 21:00 UTC for 1 hour	Dear all The plan is to have a brief ECE call on Wednesday February 12th 21:00 UTC. Many thanks to Bruce for taking control of the last call (docs at [topc6374]). I realise that we have slipped in terms of making testing progress since the face to face meeting, so perhaps this would be an opportunity to look at what we have done, and what can reasonably be done ahead of the April Content Committee meeting (into which ECE will need to report its findings). GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon Feb 10 16:21:09 Z 2014	post9572	topc6465
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday February 12th 21:00 UTC for 1 hour	Brief notes from call Present on call: Rob Hausam Yongsheng Gao Ed Cheetham Bruce Goldberg Topics covered (1) Decision regarding how much review work can be done before Copenhagen CC meeting. It was agreed that an adequate sample of test data would be produced if we simply completed the review work (certainly getting to pattern agreement) of the samples already done. This would produce 80-90 examples. (2) What would be most useful would be a clear process description (in particular emphasising the value of conflict resolution) of how to approach combination concepts. (3) Final few of the 6000 set test concepts reviewed [document posted to doc9722] (4) 5000 set concepts reworked into review/comparison spreadsheet [posted to doc9807] (5) Yong will try to introduce some illustrative concepts to his protege demonstrator. (6) Bruce will try to produce FSN revision templates for each pattern. Next call hopefully Wednesday 26th February 21:00 UTC. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Feb 21 17:58:04 Z 2014	post9643	topc6465

IHTSDO ECE PG: Revised allergy presentation for tomorrow's conference call (collabnet topic id: topc2998)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Revised allergy presentation for tomorrow's conference call	I am posting an updated version of the .ppt we were working on during the last call.	bgoldberg	Wed May 04 06:11:34 Z 2011	post4214	topc2998

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 3rd October 2012 20:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc5041)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 3rd October 2012 20:00 UTC	Dear all We have a project call for 3rd October. Principally we should discuss our proposed agenda for the Stockholm meeting later in the month, but if other items arise this will be fine. Call-in details: Line: #3 Passcode: 54362 (Dial in numbers at [doc6192]) GoToMeeting: Meeting ID: 926-408-969 https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/926408969 Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Oct 02 16:53:45 Z 2012	post7367	topc5041
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 3rd October 2012 20:00 UTC	Notes from call: Present on call: Kent Spackman Bruce Goldberg Rob Hausam Stefan Schulz Ed Cheetham Main topics discussed. Further elaboration of Bruce's interim allergy design, including feedback on the implementation testing experience. Specific discussion on an appropriate modelling of substance-specific allergic conditions (e.g. pollen-associated allergic rhinitis) - similar concern to the allergy (disposition) relationship with its 'agent'. Use of 'associated with' relationship suggested [to reflect the designed disjunction of the condition class], however acceptance of this proposal needs to be considered in the light of 'X with Y' discussions where, in one testing approach, attempts are being made to reinterpret all content such that 'associated with' can be avoided (with the use of multiple IsAs, due_to or after only). Suggested agenda for Stockholm meetings: Tuesday 23rd p.m.: Allergy discussion [BG] - summary of progress so far, discussion on open items, future planning SDP integration [EC] - report on SDP-testing experiments thus far; attempts to integrate allergy example. Wednesday 24th a.m.: X with Y [BG] - refresher discussion on work to date, discussion on progress to elaboration stage Situation interpretation of combined concepts [SS/EC] - discussion on how to incoporate this perspective into X with Y work. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Oct 10 16:04:07 Z 2012	post7448	topc5041

IHTSDO ECE PG: Face-to-face ECE meeting Amsterdam Monday 27th October 2014 and Tuesday 28th October 2014 (collabnet topic id: topc7263)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Face-to-face ECE meeting Amsterdam Monday 27th October 2014 and Tuesday 28th October 2014	Dear all Following on from last week's planning call, I have updated the meeting agenda for the two sessions we have (27th & 28th October) and posted to: https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/doc11164 [Currently at v0.21] The agenda includes the GoToMeeting details, but for completeness here they are - note they are different for the two sessions (times local for Amsterdam): Session 1: (15:30-17:00) Monday 27th October 2014: Joint session with Mapping and Implementation SIGs Mapping project group GoToMeeting: Meeting ID: 662-651-965 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/662651965 Session 2: (13:30-17:00) Tuesday 28th October 2014: ECE project group GoToMeeting: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 When I can I shall post and link to materials relating to each item. Comments of course welcome. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Thu Oct 23 15:27:20 Z 2014	post10734	topc7263
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Face-to-face ECE meeting Amsterdam Monday 27th October 2014 and Tuesday 28th October 2014	Notes from joint session can be found on the Implementation SIG site at [doc11359] Notes from ECE session Tuesday 28th October 2014 Detailed attendee list not maintained, but peak number of those present was 18. Many thanks to all those who participated. Topics discussed: Review of adequacy of X with Y materials and processes for actual modellers. Ed presented a qualitative comparison of the two existing documents which are/may be used to guide modellers. Whilst both are broadly accessible, there are clearly areas where they can be improved, and the group agreed it would be a good idea to produce a single document for editor guidance. Presentation on identified complex patterns. Yong provided the group with a scholarly wander through this topic, and his excellent and accessible perspective on how to deal with it [topc7265]. In essence he has identified that there is a large (but finite) number of ways that three concepts can be combined, and he provided a clear visual and mathematical notation for distinguishing them. During the course of the discussion it was suggested that some apparently indistinguishable patterns may be distinguishable if nested definitions were introduced). Stefan suggested that with a little bit more work the ideas put forward were suitable for publication. Review of progress applying X with Y guidance (including new elaboration doc.) to the diabetes work plus attempt to work through a number of worked examples. Paul Amos presented an update of the work he has done on diabetic complications. This, along with our group attempts to work through a small number of complex combinations led to some wavering regarding the actual meaning of ‘co-occurrence. This, in turn, led to a perusal of EN 12381 (Time standards for healthcare specific problems) and subsequently ‘Allen's interval algebra’ (thanks Stefan!) Whilst the group exercise was all a bit chaotic, there was a sense that the graphical notation used by Yong in his XYZ presentation might actually be a very useful 2 dimensional mechanism for representing the combination of three concepts. Bruce Goldberg has subsequently produced some slides exploring this topic at [post10751] Preparation of feedback to community of practice. The group agreed the following points to feed back to the community of practice: ? Progress ? Extending use of ‘X with Y’ work into routine editing ? Increased familiarity with published allergy model ? Extended our understanding or complex ‘X with Y with Z’ ? Challenges ? Attempt extension of approach applied to allergies (‘SDP’) into other content areas ? Keep ‘X with Y with Z’ approach realistic and achievable ? Priorities ? Produce dedicated modelling guide for ‘X with Y’ approach ? Produce allergy model description for proposed implementation guide ? Improve and test approach to ‘X with Y with Z’ content Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Nov 19 16:47:20 Z 2014	post10798	topc7263

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 5th September 2012 20:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc4949)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 5th September 2012 20:00 UTC	Dear all As indicated in the previous minutes [post7162] we have a project call booked for September 5th. In order to restore some momentum I would be keen to return to the 'X with Y' topic: two aspects we might like to concentrate on are: (a) Ed's sample data (at [doc6206]) with early attempt to remove 'finding/disorder' distinction. (b) Bruce's ideas on an outline approach to representing combined disorders where either a 'manifestation dominant' or 'causal dominant' approach (see [post6919]) appeared problematic. Bruce may also have some feedback on the progress made with the allergy model construction phase, and finally we should really spend some time planning the copenhagen meeting content. Call-in details: Line: #1 (yes, that's #1 - I'm assured it's now in general use) Passcode: 54362 (Dial in numbers at [doc6192]) GoToMeeting: Meeting ID: 174-166-840 https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/174166840 Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Sep 04 10:54:23 Z 2012	post7212	topc4949
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 5th September 2012 20:00 UTC	I've posted some hastily prepared slides in relation to the SDP testing here [doc6338]. Apologies that they aren't particularly clear, but hopefully we can discuss them on the call. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Sep 05 15:13:53 Z 2012	post7224	topc4949
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 5th September 2012 20:00 UTC	Dear all Many thanks to those who attended the call: Bruce Goldberg Rob Hausam Ed Cheetham Main topics discussed: 1. Allergy topic. Bruce reported very positive findings from construction phase testing work. Some desire to manage concern regarding 'propensity to adverse reaction' classes (a) because it was not clear what these meant and (b) the causative_agent role is equally uncomfortable for these classes as it is for allergy [there is no agent - just the 'threat of one']. Ed remains anxious that these changes - whilst philosophically compelling, may be disruptive to existing implementations (notably the English NHS allergy guidance. 2. X with Y: Further discussion on the idea that a 'manifestation dominant' modelling convention to X with Y patterns can at times appear inappropriate. Most persuasive examples seem to relate to those where both X and Y are 'structure/process' types (i.e. not dispositions). Possibility therefore that this kind of X with Y could/should be modelled as IsA X and IsA Y, whereas those where a disposition is present should (generally) carry an associative relationship to the disposition. Still some concern that reciprocal X due to Y Y cause of X modelling will have unintended consequences on certain retrieval/analysis behaviour. Need to check up on how to test multiple necessary and sufficient definitions in Protege 4.n. 3. Ed presented his work on testing the SDP pattern against example data ([doc6206] with slides at [doc6192]). Interest shown in more exhaustive testing of the spreadsheet examples, and also a feeling that the upper levels should be reworked to be closer to those anticipated in Stefan's original paper. Actions: Ed to continue with SDP test data. Possible benefit in 'starting again' in an attempt to align more strictly with Stefan's original paper. Ed to clarify likely UK impact of suggested inactivations (and RG'd causative_agent+after role on allergy to substance). Ed to find the guidance on multiple necessary and sufficient definitions. Bruce - to post notes summarising ongoing discussions with IHTSDO regarding the construction phase incorporation of allergy proposal into test SNOMED CT international data. Next meeting: 20:00 UTC October 3rd Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Sep 11 16:38:10 Z 2012	post7266	topc4949

IHTSDO ECE PG: Next ECE conference call (collabnet topic id: topc2936)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Next ECE conference call	Dear all It was suggested by those present on the March 23 call that the next call should be April 20th 20:00 UTC (first Wednesday/Thursday after April IHTSDO conference). Hope this will be suitable. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon Mar 28 13:25:35 Z 2011	post4022	topc2936

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday September 11th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours (collabnet topic id: topc6116)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday September 11th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Dear all We have an ECE project call on Wednesday September 11th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours Agenda: Update on progress on near and medium-term actions from last call: Sppecific topics for the call: Ed/Bruce - agenda for Washington Please note, Bruce has produced an agenda and draft presentation materials for this - if you can, please review prior to the call [topc6106] Ed - produce test plan/timetable for X with Y review Likewise, Ed has produced a first draft of this - many thanks to the observables project for providing the document structure [doc8873] Additional topics to keep track of All - continued review of 4th test set [doc8565: XwithYSyndrome20130710.xlsx] Bruce - update on discussing aspirational allergy model with Stefan Paul - produce fast track project document for pollen allergen issue GoToMeeting details are the same as last time: Meeting ID: 692-600-464 https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/692600464 Telephony will be VoIP only Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Sep 10 16:03:22 Z 2013	post8968	topc6116
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday September 11th 2013 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	Notes from call: Present on call: Stefan Schulz Bruce Goldberg Rob Hausam Paul Amos Topics discussed: (1) The group reviewed the draft slides that Bruce had produced for the Allergy/Hypersensitivity part of the Washington meeting. There was general agreement that they were excellent, covering all the topics which would be discussed, with a good balance between informative sections introducing the topics to be discussed and slides asking questions to be answered. Clearly there are a few placeholder slides (e.g. the "insert..." one) but this is a really good start. (2) There was some specific discussion on the relationship between allergic reaction and allergy. Stefan explained how one reasonable interpretation would be to make reactions subtypes of dispositions (since the reaction implies the existence of the disposition in a situation interpretation). The group understood the explanation, but the general response (correctly or not) was that this was a radical departure from the last year or more of thinking. The fact that the current allergy work used the word 'condition' was not felt to be an obstacle to reading the data in a 'situation interpretation', but instead suggested that we just needed a new word for 'conditions' as referenced in the 'situation interpretation work'. (3) The group discussed the first draft of the X with Y review plan, as well as taking the opportunity to discuss a single example from the Phase 4 testing (cerebellar ataxia associated with another disorder). The discussion showed the superficial benefit of a modelling heuristic which disallowed 'associated with' (forcing causation of some kind), but this approach can be challenged by other interpretations - arguably we do not know the direction of any causation for example. This specific discussion, and the plan review, suggested that a valuable additional outcome measure would be identification of the specific lexical patterns (especially connectives) which are associated with the best inter-rater consistency. (4) Paul explained that he hoped to have draft work ready from his Elaboration/Construction work on Diabetic complications. As this work has used (and contributed to) ideas in this project, he has requested that the group review a sample/specific examples from this work on the next call. Paul also would like to progress the allergy to pollen/pollen allergen proposal by the next call. Next call and actions: Bruce & Stefan - communicate regarding the 'aspirational allergy model'. Ed - progress the test plan document and produce slides for same (and most recent draft of patterns doc), and firm up agenda for Washington. Paul - prepare Diabetic complication examples and pollen allergy materials for next call. Rob - may bring examples to call for discussion. Next call 25th September 2013 21:00 UTC. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Sep 17 15:18:29 Z 2013	post8986	topc6116

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday December 4th 2013 21:30 UTC for 1.5 hours - PLEASE NOTE TIME... (collabnet topic id: topc6282)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday December 4th 2013 21:30 UTC for 1.5 hours - PLEASE NOTE TIME...	As planned, we have an ECE project call for 4th December 2013. With your permission I would like to delay the start of this call until 21:30, since I shall not be available until then. Otherwise it's as normal. Topics to discuss include: - Follow-up on any actions of last call - Feedback and review of last round of X with Y testing work - Feedback on CliniClue automated Excel file for X with Y work. GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon Dec 02 16:20:53 Z 2013	post9258	topc6282
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday December 4th 2013 21:30 UTC for 1.5 hours - PLEASE NOTE TIME...	Dear all In anticipation of the call on 4th December, I have posted a zip file containing three independent X with Y reviews at [doc9475], and an initial attempt to assess the extent of agreement, and allow us to target discussions on the call [doc9476]. Green cells in sheet 1 indicates all three agree, yellow two, and red none! Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Dec 03 22:34:57 Z 2013	post9277	topc6282
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday December 4th 2013 21:30 UTC for 1.5 hours - PLEASE NOTE TIME...	Notes from Call 4th December 2013 Present on call Bruce Goldberg Yonsheng Gao Paul Amos Ed Cheetham Stefan Schulz Topics discussed. As intended, the majority of the call was spent reviewing the most recent X with Y testing data (references in preceding posts). Of particular interest (and perhaps slightly worrying) was that Yong's responses appeared consistently different to Bruce's and Ed's (in general Yong favoured pattern 1 where Ed & Bruce favour patterns 2 & 3). The optimistic reading of this is that Yong (as a relative newcomer to the testing work) will come to see that pattern 2 & 3 (manifestation dominant) modelling is a 'better' approach; a pessimistic interpretation is that patterns 1, 2 & 3 are equally valid, their selection depending predominantly on some arbitrary interpretation of existing SNOMED CT content. The other worrying issue is the pace of review (for pattern disagreement content) - each concept taking approximately 15 minutes of conflict resolution without a guarantee of consensus. Plan: to continue reviewing the previous two test sets (rather than starting anything new) - call scheduled for December 18th 21:00 UTC Ed	edcheetham	Wed Dec 18 09:49:23 Z 2013	post9352	topc6282

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 28th September 2011 - 20:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc3761)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 28th September 2011 - 20:00 UTC	We have a project call on Wednesday 28th September 2011 - 20:00-22:00 UTC Draft agenda: (1) brief recap of 21st September call (2) MAIN TOPIC tidy up of materials from call, address outstanding questions [notably in doc4538]. Materials posted by Bruce here: topc3755 topc3756 topc3757 (3) planning for Sydney face-to-face meeting. Call Instructions: Usual IHTSDO call instructions [doc3360] Line #2 Passcode 54362# GoToMeeting https://www1.gotomeeting.com/join/282737160 Meeting ID: 282-737-160 Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Sep 27 15:58:12 Z 2011	post5362	topc3761
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 28th September 2011 - 20:00 UTC	GoToMeeting is misbehaving (or I've done something wrong)! It wants us to use meeting ID 957-338-152 today instead of the one I posted. Ed	edcheetham	Wed Sep 28 20:12:03 Z 2011	post5372	topc3761
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Conference call 28th September 2011 - 20:00 UTC	Many thanks to those who attended the call> In attendance: Ed Cheetham Bruce Goldberg Rob Hausam Apologies Jon Patrick Kent Spackman Main topics discussed: Open issues on model/use case comparison: Value of condition class - Ed to try and align allergy model with proposal as illustrated in Stefan's paper (for the record, this paper is discussed here [post4405] and found here [http://www.jbiomedsem.com/content/2/S2/S6]). halLocus for allergic process - need to discuss with Stefan regarding the hasLocus/inheresIn roles in biotop. hasOutcome some bearerOf... - (1) need to check whether there actually has to be a 'structure' as the outcome (or whether this can just be implied) and (2) if there needs to be something, consider whether the relevant structure is something like 'sensitised immune system cell' Allergen-specific IgE... cell - Bruce to consider what the 'other' participant structures would be to suppor the definition of other non-IgE-mediated immune processes (e.g. cytotoxic T-cells, immune complex structures etc.) Current versus proposal model considerations: For each class - (1) need to elaborate 'how' any changes relating to the condition/SDP approach could be beneficially introduced for 'allergy' whilst leaving the vast majority of SNOMED CT content unaffected. (2) probable need to develop a 'flat' and a 'nested' proposal (as with Observables) (3) ? need to support universal restrictions (or whether the proposal could - imperfectly - cope with existential restrictions alone). For disposition/reaction classes - need to introduce isRealisationOf/hasRealisation roles For reaction - Rob - some question as to the global value of 'hasOutcome allergic disorder' Agenda for Sydney: Bruce to post most recent version; suspect that there will easily be a half-day's material with allergy alone, but a 'combined condition' update would be good to remind those present of the wider scope of the project. Next meeting: Sydney October 10, 2011 1:00 PM - 5:30 PM local time. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Fri Sep 30 16:38:24 Z 2011	post5377	topc3761

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Project Group face-to-face meeting in Crystal City, VA, USA (collabnet topic id: topc6162)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Project Group face-to-face meeting in Crystal City, VA, USA	Dear all The latest draft agenda for the Event Condition and Episode project group (meeting October 8th & 9th 2013, Sheraton Crystal City, Arlington Virginia 22202) are posted here: https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/doc8968 Links to relevant documents can be posted in this thread, for example: For Wednesday meeting: X with Y testing approach: https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/doc8873 X with Y patterns document: https://csfe.aceworkspace.net/sf/go/doc7179 Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Thu Oct 03 15:40:23 Z 2013	post9042	topc6162
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Project Group face-to-face meeting in Crystal City, VA, USA	Hi All Quick note to say thanks to everyone who participated, and especially to Bruce for all his hard work in presenting and chairing the meetings. Apologies for the problems we experience with remote attendance, but nevertheless we did seem to get answers to some of the outstanding questions in the allergy session, and the feedback we got whilst talking through the X with Y proposal and testing work has helped us revise/reframe our approach. I am very grateful for this valuable input. There are probably more documents to post (attendee list, report to CC etc.), but as a starter set the slides I presented are here: doc9093: X with Y patterns presentation doc9094: Testing experience presentation doc9095: Test data Feb-August 2013 doc9096: Testing approach proposal If possible I would like to have a conference call 21:00 UTC on Wednesday 23rd October. It looks as though Daylight Saving changes the weekends that follow (e.g. 27/28 October for UK, 3/4 November for US), so we can deal with that problem later! Kind regards and thanks again Ed	edcheetham	Thu Oct 10 10:31:19 Z 2013	post9073	topc6162
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE Project Group face-to-face meeting in Crystal City, VA, USA	Here are some other documents collated as feedback from the Washington face-to-face meetings: doc9259: Representation of Hypersensitivity and Allergy in SNOMED CT-final Washington 2013.pptx doc9260: ECE project - Plenary Washington 2013.pptx doc9261: ECE face to face attendance list Washington 2013.docx doc9262: The ECE project group update Washington 2013.docx Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Oct 23 14:27:58 Z 2013	post9138	topc6162

IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday January 15th 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours (collabnet topic id: topc6374)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday January 15th 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours	As planned, we have our first 2014 ECE project call on January 15th. Continuing the testing theme from the end of 2013, topics to discuss include: - Continued review of last round of X with Y testing work [doc9475] & [doc9476]. - Planning timetable for January-March 2014 - Plan any further work for Allergy aspect of project work. GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Tue Jan 14 18:53:38 Z 2014	post9414	topc6374
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday January 15th 21:00 UTC for 1.5 hours - CANCELLED	Dear all Apologies for the short notice, but I regret that I will not be able to attend/lead this call today. As such I think it's probably best that we postpone and try to pick up again in two weeks time. Once again apologies. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Wed Jan 15 17:32:37 Z 2014	post9423	topc6374

IHTSDO ECE PG: Next ECE call - 21 or 28 January 2015? (collabnet topic id: topc7345)

Title	Content	Created By	Date Created	ID	Topic ID
IHTSDO ECE PG: Next ECE call - 21 or 28 January 2015?	Dear all After a welcome break it is time to resume the ECE project group calls. How would participants feel about either 21 or 28 January 2015 (starting with a time of 21:00 UTC but can vary if needed)? Topics to be discussed over the next few months are listed in the posting at [post10886]. Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Thu Jan 08 16:00:48 Z 2015	post10887	topc7345
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Next ECE call - 21st January 2015	Dear all Many thanks for the feedback. We shall have our first 2015 call on 21st January @ 21:00 UTC. As noted before, topics to be discussed can be found in the posting at [post10886], perhaps concentrating on "...Attempt extension of approach applied to allergies (‘SDP’) into other content areas..." for this call GoToMeeting will be: Meeting ID: 175-028-173 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/175028173 Telephony will be via VoIP Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Mon Jan 19 15:09:42 Z 2015	post10908	topc7345
Re: IHTSDO ECE PG: Next ECE call - 21 or 28 January 2015?	Notes from call [apologies for the delay in posting] Present on call: Bruce Goldberg Ed Cheetham Stefan Schulz Paul Amos Yongsheng Gao Topics discussed: (1) X with Y with Z (a) Yong is happy to prepare a repeat presentation, but would like more time to work through some of the details and issues raised during discussions in Amsterdam. (b) Stefan still keen to explore an academic paper employing Yong's approach, but has not recently had time to pursue this. Yong and Stefan to liaise as time allows. (2) Allen's interval algebra Main part of call on this topic, in particular regarding the applicability of the phases [see e.g. post10835] to the causal (due_to) and temporal (after) associations used in the project. There did eventually seem to be some consensus on the kinds of a + b overlap which were covered by co-occurrence, but the interplay between this, 'causation' and succession remains complex. The main problem we keep bumping into might perhaps be illustrated by the conflict between: Logically: Due_to implies After In clinical language (certainly in English): After frequently implies Due_to As such (for many purposes) it is difficult to draw a distinction between 'after' and 'due_to' patterns, and the distinction currently shown is essentially arbitrary (in particular between p, m, and o patterns). (3) Bruce verbally presented a proposal for how to represent co-occurrence and causation where there is also negation using the current SNOMED CT model (examples discussed 'skull fracture with coma' and 'skull fracture without coma'. In the latter case implied causation could be represented, in the former the negation could be represented (using the explicit situation model). What is currently impossible is the representation of causation within the explicit situation model. (4) Bruce has offered to try and get access to some frequency data from KP to assist in our extension to the allergy model to other areas. (5) Stefan will look to see of the interval algebra/clinical language of time work can be used to prepare a paper for the upcoming ICBO meeting. Next meeting: 18th February 2015 21:00 Kind regards Ed	edcheetham	Thu Feb 12 14:46:07 Z 2015	post10983	topc7345

Archived Collabnet Discussions

Group discussions

Latest allergy file 08--12--2011 (collabnet topic id: topc3631)

Five more complex (>2) combined disorders (collabnet topic id: topc6921)

Notes on allergy construction phase (collabnet topic id: topc4962)

Revised allergy ontology (collabnet topic id: topc3185)

Discussion of causality for complications--sequelae (collabnet topic id: topc5333)

Conditions vs. Situation (collabnet topic id: topc4412)

Elaboration phase document for X with Y project (collabnet topic id: topc7110)

Disease Model article published (collabnet topic id: topc3076)

eMeasure issues group meeting (collabnet topic id: topc5647)

Top 2500 KP diagnoses for SDP analysis (collabnet topic id: topc7391)

Additional file for Wed. meeting (collabnet topic id: topc4224)

My completed assignment (collabnet topic id: topc7011)

Pseudoallergies (collabnet topic id: topc5580)

Meeting this week II (collabnet topic id: topc3756)

Updated SDP allergy owl file (collabnet topic id: topc4427)

XwithYSyndrome20130710 (collabnet topic id: topc6019)

Files for today's meeting (collabnet topic id: topc4684)

Most recent diagram (R4) of allergy classes (collabnet topic id: topc3054)

ECE XYZ model in OWL (collabnet topic id: topc6375)

X with Y caused by Z demo in OWL (collabnet topic id: topc6554)

X with Y complex patterns - examples in OWL (collabnet topic id: topc7266)

New allergy owl file (collabnet topic id: topc4799)

Some thoughts on syndromes and compound conditions (collabnet topic id: topc4755)

X ic disorders (collabnet topic id: topc4807)

complex combined disorders for modeling (collabnet topic id: topc7264)

X with Y morphologies (collabnet topic id: topc5329)

X_with_Y_proposal_draft_20140223 (collabnet topic id: topc6552)

Files for next meeting Nov 28 (collabnet topic id: topc5209)

new .owl file (collabnet topic id: topc4538)

Files for today's ECE meeting (collabnet topic id: topc6036)

Pseudoallergy and allergy concept models (collabnet topic id: topc5646)

Template for X with Y test concepts (collabnet topic id: topc5775)

Elaboration phase document for X with Y project (collabnet topic id: topc7165)

Owl file for allergy classes (collabnet topic id: topc3053)

Latest edited allergy owl file (collabnet topic id: topc3677)

Additional comments on allergies (collabnet topic id: topc4410)

Examples of x with y patterns represented using Allen's time intervals - revised (collabnet topic id: topc7313)

Slides for Representation of multiple conditions as a situation (collabnet topic id: topc7047)

Revised allergy class diageam and .owl file for todays discussion (collabnet topic id: topc4537)

milk eczema_BG revisions 20110630.owl (collabnet topic id: topc3599)

Bruce's 3rd phase review (collabnet topic id: topc5951)

Updated elaboration phase document for artf6166 X with Y, X due to + slide deck from today's authoring meeting (collabnet topic id: topc7221)

Relationship between ECE and observables work (collabnet topic id: topc2926)

Allergy documents for Oct 2013 IHTSDO meeting (collabnet topic id: topc6106)

X with Y test: Stefan's ratings (collabnet topic id: topc5803)

Revisesd list Top 2500 KP problem list diagnoses with usage for SDP analysis (collabnet topic id: topc7392)

allergic disorder descendants (collabnet topic id: topc4459)

Additional comments about pseudoallergy (collabnet topic id: topc5718)

Revised elaboration phase document Artf 6262_Allergic_state_-_Immune_hypersensitivity_disorder-elaboration_phase_v3.0 (collabnet topic id: topc5735)

Should anatomy classes in SNOMED refer to canonical anatomy ? (collabnet topic id: topc3628)

Examples of x with y patterns represented using Allen's time intervals (collabnet topic id: topc7272)

Revised Visio allergy file (collabnet topic id: topc4280)

An additional 5 complex concepts to model (collabnet topic id: topc6953)

Meeting this week (collabnet topic id: topc3755)

Draft naming conventions for conjunctiva patterns (collabnet topic id: topc6519)

Follow-up to today's meeting (collabnet topic id: topc4411)

Slides for X with Y complex patterns (collabnet topic id: topc7265)

Revised allergy class diagram based on Ed and Bruce discussion May 9, 2012 (collabnet topic id: topc4541)

Meeting this week III (collabnet topic id: topc3757)

Interesting discussion in SHRD project... (collabnet topic id: topc5706)

Allergy presentation for IHTSDO (collabnet topic id: topc5111)

X with Y proposal draft with addition of *after* sub pattern (collabnet topic id: topc6029)

New version of completed assignment (collabnet topic id: topc7013)

Pseudoallergies2 (collabnet topic id: topc5610)

Revised allergy classes visio file (collabnet topic id: topc3186)

Documents for Wed. meeting (collabnet topic id: topc4223)

Fuiles for IHTSDO meeting (collabnet topic id: topc7246)

Complex combined disorders (collabnet topic id: topc6681)

Update on allergy model construction phase (collabnet topic id: topc5062)

Updated allergy class diagram (collabnet topic id: topc4370)

Some more allergy updates (collabnet topic id: topc3778)

Modeling examples from today's meeting (collabnet topic id: topc5253)

Allergy model owl file (collabnet topic id: topc5141)

Here is mine (collabnet topic id: topc5801)

General__Project__Group__Notifications

IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: IHTSDO ECE PG: Wednesday April 16th 20:00 UTC for 1.5 hours (collabnet topic id: topc6652)

IHTSDO ECE PG: Conference call 20th April 2011 - 20:00 UTC. (collabnet topic id: topc2974)

IHTSDO ECE PG: ECE call Wednesday 17th April 2013, 20:00 - 22:00 UTC (collabnet topic id: topc5828)

X with Y proposal draft with addition of after sub pattern (collabnet topic id: topc6029)

GeneralProjectGroup__Notifications