2024-09-04 - Laboratory Terminology Standards WG Meeting

1

Welcome / new intros

Working group previous introductions - https://snomed.zoom.us/rec/share/ShMJVhG-hwCn9CScXKSnioDDNcyNaTj2qUp0_3nlrESv3b5EW-C2hjnjKxIsKGrU.2b4vaHE5PPexhHRO

2

Stan Huff - LOINC history and thought for SNOMED lab results

See slides

Proposed roadmap for the Working Group

1. Attributes - Make a start on some of these at the next session. KN action to go and consult the experts from the Observables and Investigations Project Group, anyone involved in the LOINC-SNOMED CT expression refset, and Nebraska Lexicon. We can go back a step to understand the instigation of the model and application of the defining attributes, and then relate to the current SNOMED CT lab observable entity content modelling in the extensions. The desired outcome here would be editorial principles for consistent application of the defining attributes and authoring guidance.

2. Post-coordination – Stan hit the same notes and described very similar design principles applied (in the UK FHIR-SNOMED CT implementation guide) re the role of the information model and SNOMED CT value sets in representing the lab result. Many questions here about how we reconcile the existing content and agree / decide on which lab specialisms benefit more from a post-coordinated model and how we do this. As Gunnar says for the EU LOINC-NPU requirement (and covered in Stan’s slides) methods and specimen types stand out as the main candidates for post-coordination enabling slicker structured data design using terminology codes.

3. Complex test representation in the SNOMED CT logical model – we touched on this in the discussion and this group should look at the overlapping use-cases to understand what the possibilities are for a computable representation in SNOMED CT. Definitely one of the main struggles for the UK NRC terminology authors. Again, here there is much history / output we can draw on from the Observables and Investigations Project Group.

3

 AOB