| 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: 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 Agglutination test. Property = Presence, , Technique = Latex agglutination 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 presented 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 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: | |
