2020-12-02 - SLPG Meeting

Date & Time

20:00 to 21:00 UTC Wednesday 2nd December 2020

Location

Zoom meeting link (password: 764978)

Goals

Discuss a few ECL questions
Consider postcoordination use cases

Attendees

Chair: @Former user (Deleted)
Project Group: @Anne Randorff Højen, @Peter Jordan (Unlicensed), @Daniel Karlsson (Unlicensed), @michael lawley, @Rob Hausam, @Darryn McGaw

Apologies

Agenda and Meeting Notes

Description	Owner	Notes

Description	Owner	Notes
Welcome and agenda	@Former user (Deleted)	NOTE This is the last meeting for 2020 Meetings will resume in 2021 on Wednesday 27th January.
ECL Quick Reference	@Former user (Deleted)	On request, we have developed an ECL Quick Reference page with a summary of the ECL syntax and examples. Could the SLPG please review this page, and provide feedback. We plan to publish this as soon as possible.
ECL and Concrete Values	@Former user (Deleted)	For discussion: Can '' represent any decimal, integer or string, when used as the value of a data attribute? < 27658006 \|Amoxicillin\|-containing product : 189999999103 \|Has strength magnitude\| = , 199999999101 \|Has strength unit\| = 258684004 \|mg\| < 373873005 \|Pharmaceutical / biologic product\| : 209999999104 \|Has trade name\| = * Are the following valid expression constraints (assume the attributes are data attribute)? < 27658006 \|Amoxicillin\|-containing product\| . 189999999103 \|Has strength magnitude\| < 373873005 \|Pharmaceutical / biologic product\| . 209999999104 \|Has trade name\|
Postcoordination Use Case Examples	All	Example 1 - Mapping Example 2 - Terminology binding Example 3 - Dentistry / Odontogram Example 4 - Natural Language Processing
Postcoordination Guidance	@Former user (Deleted) , @Anne Randorff Højen , @Kai Kewley	Practical Guide to Postcoordination Proposal - Use syntax (i.e. braces) to distinguish refinement vs new role group There should be a syntactic distinction between refinement and constructive addition (ie adding a new role group). That is: 83152002 \|Oophorectomy\| : 405815000 \|Procedure device\| = 122456005 \|Laser device\| is classified as (i.e. the refinement is added to the role groups in the definition of the focus concept(s)): 83152002 \|Oophorectomy\| : { 260686004 \|Method\| = 129304002 \|Excision - action\|, 405813007 \|Procedure site - Direct\| = 15497006 \|Ovarian structure\|, 405815000 \|Procedure device\| = 122456005 \|Laser device\| } 83152002 \|Oophorectomy\| : { 405815000 \|Procedure device\| = 122456005 \|Laser device\| } is classified as: 83152002 \|Oophorectomy\| : { 260686004 \|Method\| = 129304002 \|Excision - action\|, 405813007 \|Procedure site - Direct\| = 15497006 \|Ovarian structure\|}, { 405815000 \|Procedure device\| = 122456005 \|Laser device\| } However, for attributes which are always self-grouped - i.e. Priority, Due to, After, Before, During, Clinical course, Temporally related to, and all Observable entity attributes (see Relationship Group), these must always be put into their own role group: 125605004 \| Fracture of bone \|: 42752001 \| Due to (attribute) \| = 1912002 \| Fall \| is classified as: 125605004 \| Fracture of bone \|: { 42752001 \| Due to (attribute) \| = 1912002 \| Fall \| } or 125605004 \| Fracture of bone \|: { 363698007 \|Finding site\| = 272673000 \|Bone structure\|, 116676008 \|Associated morphology \| = 72704001 \|Fracture\| } { 42752001 \| Due to (attribute) \| = 1912002 \| Fall \| } Proposal: Expression forms needed for this (see 3.4 Transforming Expressions) Close to user form - e.g. 83152002 \|Oophorectomy\| : 405815000 \|Procedure device\| = 122456005 \|Laser device\| Canonical close to user form - e.g. 83152002:405815000=122456005 Classifiable form (SCG) - e.g. 83152002:{260686004=129304002,405813007=15497006,405815000=122456005} PLUS Classifiable form (OWL) - e.g. EquivalentClasses(:123063 ObjectIntersectionOf (:71388002 ObjectSomeValuesFrom(:609096000 ObjectIntersectionOf( ObjectSomeValuesFrom(:260686004 :129304002) ObjectSomeValuesFrom(:405813007 :15497006)))) Necessary normal form - e.g. 83152002+416376001:{260686004=129304002,405813007=15497006,405815000=122456005} PLUS Necessary normal form (tables) Relationships: (123063 116680003 83152002) - 0 (123063 260686004 129304002) - 0 (123063 405813007 15497006) - 1 (123063 405815000 122456005) - 1 Primitive expressions - "<<<" (only useful in a mapping context) → .... relies on the assigned identifier (which are necessarily semantically unique). Proposed Transformation Rules - Refinements (in valid domain of focus concepts) Close-to-user-form - IF the grouping of the refinement is not concept model valid THEN If there is a single (non-self-grouped) role group in the definition of the focus concept, then any ungrouped (but groupable) refinements are merged with this role group If there is more than one (non-self-grouped) role group in the definition then flag as ambiguous and require refinement NEED TO FIND a realistic clinical example where this may occur // Prevent failing cases from coming up // use template ALTERNATIVE: Refinement is applied to all (non-self-grouped) role groups in the definition Self-grouped attributes in the refinement are grouped on their own - i.e. Priority, Due to, After, Before, During, Clinical course, Temporally related to, and all Observable entity attributes (see Relationship Group) Self-grouped attributes in the definition of the focus concept(s) are left unchanged Single refinement 83152002 \|Oophorectomy\| : 405815000 \|Procedure device\| = 122456005 \|Laser device\| → 83152002 \|Oophorectomy\| : { 260686004 \|Method\| = 129304002 \|Excision - action\| , 405813007 \|Procedure site - direct\| = 15497006 \|Ovarian structure\|, 405815000 \|Procedure device\| = 122456005 \|Laser device\| } Two groupable refinements 83152002 \|Oophorectomy\| : 405815000 \|Procedure device\| = 122456005 \|Laser device\|, 363700003 \|Direct morphology\| = 367643001 \|Cyst \| → 83152002 \|Oophorectomy\| : { 260686004 \|Method\| = 129304002 \|Excision - action\| , 405813007 \|Procedure site - direct\| = 15497006 \|Ovarian structure\|, 405815000 \|Procedure device\| = 122456005 \|Laser device\| , 363700003 \|Direct morphology\| = 367643001 \|Cyst \| } One groupable refinement with one self-grouped refinement 83152002 \|Oophorectomy\| : 405815000 \|Procedure device\| = 122456005 \|Laser device\|, 260870009 \|Priority\| = 394849002 \|High priority\| → 83152002 \|Oophorectomy\| : { 260686004 \|Method\| = 129304002 \|Excision - action\| , 405813007 \|Procedure site - direct\| = 15497006 \|Ovarian structure\|, 405815000 \|Procedure device\| = 122456005 \|Laser device\| } { 260870009 \|Priority (attribute)\| = 394849002 \|High priority\| } Refinement attribute matches (or subsumed by) attribute in focus concept's definition 83152002 \|Oophorectomy\| : 260686004 \|Method\| = 277261002 \|Excision biopsy (qualifier value)\| → 83152002 \|Oophorectomy\| : { 260686004 \|Method\| = 129304002 \|Excision - action\| , 260686004 \|Method\| = 277261002 \|Excision biopsy (qualifier value)\| , 405813007 \|Procedure site - direct\| = 15497006 \|Ovarian structure\| } Refinement explicitly in role group 83152002 \|Oophorectomy\| : { 260686004 \|Method\| = 281615006 \| Exploration - action \| , 405813007 \|Procedure site - direct\| = 367643001 \|Cyst \| } → 83152002 \|Oophorectomy\| :