[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Health-dev] [bug #40767] Freetext ICD-10 references as URIs (e.g. i

From: Chris
Subject: Re: [Health-dev] [bug #40767] Freetext ICD-10 references as URIs (e.g. icd10:A01)
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 17:28:10 -0700
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)


Hehe, glad to have a response! I've been going through some of these old
reports and it's good to see interest in 1yr+ old reports. =-)

On 04/26/15, Wes Turner wrote:
> More of an enhancement suggestion really. So that's a (hypothetical) URI
> prefix for one coding system.
> More linked data = better.

Agreed. =-)

> supports a number of coding systems:
> > The schema does provide a way to annotate entities with codes that refer
> to existing controlled medical vocabularies (such as MeSH, SNOMED, ICD,
> RxNorm, UMLS, etc) when they are available. For example, see the sample
> markup for MedicalScholarlyArticle.
> Somewhat unfortunately, many of the referenced schema do not have canonical
> URIs as keys (which can be fudged w/ an ad-hoc prefix like "icd10:" even in
> unstructured notes).

I'm still somewhat confused where you are suggesting the markup and
schema should be added. For external reports and interoperability? Or
internal use, (in)visible to users? I think you are saying that better
internal schemas would help with data analysis and similar. I think so,
too. Although internally, GNU Health already uses some coding systems,
but I would like to add more support. For example, SNOMED defines degree
modifiers (Mild, Moderate, etc.) which are present already in Health,
but we could attach the SNOMED code to these modifiers for better
interoperability and compliance. Or am I misunderstanding you? Probably!



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]