2019 X finding not seen - content planned for inactivation

2019 X finding not seen - content planned for inactivation

Summary

Please be advised we are looking to inactivate the following content as it has been determined to be ambiguous at an international level. The concepts may mean <x> was looked for and not observed or was not looked for. 

  • 289346002 |Fetus not seen (finding)|

  • 289401002 |Presenting part not seen (finding)|

  • 289433006 |Fetal movements not observed (finding)| has synonym: Fetal movements not seen

  • 289440007 |Fetal heart rate not observed (finding)| has synonym: Fetal heart rate not seen

  • 300166005 |Ossicles not seen (finding)|

  • 300174006 |Incus not seen (finding)|

  • 300179001 |Stapes not seen (finding)|

  • 300170002 |Malleus not seen (finding)|

  • 247267005 |Tympanic membrane not visible (finding)| has synonym: Eardrum not seen

  • 300121001 |Ear canal not seen (finding)|

  • 300163002 |Middle ear not seen (finding)|

  • 289468006 |Vulva not seen (finding)|

  • 248865009 |Orifice of Bartholin's duct not seen (finding)|

  • 289611004 |Hymen not seen (finding)|

  • 289512004 |Vagina not seen (finding)|

  • 300270009 |Pharynx not seen (finding)|

  • 301959000 |Optic disc not seen (finding)|

  • 300342009 |Gallbladder not seen (finding)|

  • 289756001 |Uterine cervix not seen (finding)|

  • 720446005 |Alveolar macrophage not seen (finding)| 

O/E 'not seen' concepts already flagged for return to the UK in the July 2020 release. 

 

If these concepts are used and and have a clear meaning within your country and this plan would impact you please advise @Nicola Ingram from the SNOMED International Content Team by Friday 6th December.  

 

Actions: 

Date

Requested action

Requester(s)

Response required by:

Comments

Date

Requested action

Requester(s)

Response required by:

Comments

20 November 2019

Please see above.

@Cathy Richardson @Nicola Ingram

@Camilla Wiberg Danielsen <x> not seen content, planned for inactivation. Response by Dec 6, 2019 please.
@Daniel Karlsson <x> not seen content, planned for inactivation. Response by Dec 6, 2019 please.
@Former user (Deleted) <x> not seen content, planned for inactivation. Response by Dec 6, 2019 please.
@Elze de Groot (Unlicensed) <x> not seen content, planned for inactivation. Response by Dec 6, 2019 please
@Linda Parisien <x> not seen content, planned for inactivation. Response by Dec 6, 2019 please.
@Matt Cordell <x> not seen content, planned for inactivation. Response by Dec 6, 2019 please.
@Former user (Deleted) <x> not seen content, planned for inactivation. Response by Dec 6, 2019 please.
@Jostein Ven (Unlicensed) <x> not seen content, planned for inactivation. Response by Dec 6, 2019 please.
@Theresa Barry <x> not seen content, planned for inactivation. Response by Dec 6, 2019 please.

Please post your final responses in the Country response table below. Discussion comments can be made as comments.

 

 

 

  File Modified
No files shared here yet.

Relevant documents

Links

Country response 

Country

Date

Response

Country

Date

Response

 Netherlands

20-11-2019 

 We asked about the meaning of this content, so I think that was the trigger to consider inactivation. We didn't know how to translate this content because of its ambiguity, so we agree with inactivation.

Norway

 27-11-2019

We agree that the concepts are ambiguous, and agree to inactivate

 United Kingdom

 27-11-2019

 Although many of these concepts have exceedingly low annual usage in the UK, a couple of them have significantly higher usage, for example 247267005 Tympanic membrane not visible (finding), which I presume is being recorded as part of a general ear examination, with the meaning that the examiner has been unable to visualize the tympanic membrane for whatever reason. This concept looks to be one of a set relating to degree of visibility of the tympanic membrane, and inactivating this one concept would result in a 'gap' in this set. Likewise 289433006 Fetal movements not observed (finding), which has steady usage in the UK, and which I interpret as meaning 'as part of e.g. an ultrasound examination, no fetal movements have been observed'. For these two, and possibly others, the intention is to convey the fact that an examiner has been unable to visualize a particular structure. If the plan is to inactivate these without replacement, this would cause us mapping problems (as many of these look to originate in CTV3). Inactivation of the 'not seen' descriptions, where other descriptions are active on a concept, would be preferable. I'll email Nicola Ingram as suggested above with comments.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Member countries without a CMAG rep

 

 

 

CMAG response

Date

CMAG Response

Next steps

Date

CMAG Response

Next steps

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Final outcome: 

Date: 

 

Copyright © 2026, SNOMED International