Atlassian uses cookies to improve your browsing experience, perform analytics and research, and conduct advertising. Accept all cookies to indicate that you agree to our use of cookies on your device.
Atlassian uses cookies to improve your browsing experience, perform analytics and research, and conduct advertising. Accept all cookies to indicate that you agree to our use of cookies on your device. Atlassian cookies and tracking notice, (opens new window)
Continue to elaborate the migration model for laboratory measurement procedures
Discussion items
Item
Description
Time
Owner
Notes
Action
Item
Description
Time
Owner
Notes
Action
1
Welcome
@Daniel Karlsson
DO NOT FORGET TO RECORD!
2
Conflicts of interest
@Daniel Karlsson
3
Discussion Phase 1 dataset for migration trial
57 min
@Jim Campbell
@Former user (Deleted)
@Daniel Karlsson
Review of progress with conversion file for UK labs
Modelling issues suggested by classification of Phase 1 migration set
Followup on issues from last meeting:
Timed specimens shall be identified by instance time stamp of acquisition
24 hour urine testing deferred to committee deliberation
Red cell indices such as Mean corpuscular volume. Representation of averages (or any aggregation) has not yet been finally agreed on,proceed with proposed model
Anti-mitocondrial antobody pattern, Leukocyte ALP → items deferred to Observables deliberation
Titre. How to represent titre in relation to presence and quantity concentration; deferred to committee
Von Willebrand factor activity - likely a process observable and out of scope.
Produce an OWL file based on decisions made and compare hierarchy of reclassified Observables to Evaluation procedures.
2021-11-03:
@Jim Campbell work since last time.
DK: additional, the differences found between the Evalualtion procedure hierarchy and the E2O Observable hierarchy have highlighted issues with the Evaluation procedure hierarchy.
Discussion about future progress of E2O
UK current decision is to use Procedures in the context of ordering
There would in the UK content not be duplicates between "ordering" and "result" concepts.
Keeping two hierarchies with essentially the same meaning introduces maintenance challenges
There would be modeling solutions to keep hierarchies in sync, IFF it is possible to write clear guidance on when to use which hierarchy
2021-11-17:
Next steps would necessary include the creation of templates for the common lab areas
Inactivations of groupers such as "Sodium measurement" - replacement with e.g. "Sodium ion quantity concentration in liquid substance"
@Yongsheng Gao propose to create new SCTIDs for Observables and create "link" between Evaluation procedure and Observable concepts.
Templates is a good way to get agreement on the application of the (generic) Observables model.
2021-12-15:
Proposal: look for subsumees of high-frequency concepts @Daniel Karlsson will check
Implementation process:
Inform CoP that the project is being done
Project statement (cf. project template)
Limit to reportables (for the time being...)
Keep both procedures and observables while under development
Maintain "map"/association refset between corresponding existing evalutation procedures and new observables
Develop in a community area
Steps:
Get moduleId
Set up community area
Develop templates
@Daniel Karlsson Bring up generic aggregate observable topic on a future Observables meeting.