Re: [COAS-List] Action item from Denver

[Tim Brinson <tim@protocol.com>]

Tom Culpepper wrote:
> 
> Here is the event document from Stan Huff.
> 
> http://www.mcis.duke.edu/standards/HL7/committees/vocabulary/HuffIMIAWG6Paper.zip

I have read it and have a few comments and questions.  It seems
appropriate for COAS ideas and it has many similar semantics to DICOM SR
and GEHR/EHCR-SupA.

Does the Related Surface Forms (RSF) show up in LQS?  At first I thought
it was the Systemizations but then saw they are covered under
SemanticLinks (I think?).  RSF don't look like Presentations either
since the original concept and the RSF each have presentations.

The choices for type Value are similar to those in DICOM SR.  I used
both lists (and GEHR and Sunquest model) to create a complete list of
observation value types in some IDL yesterday.  I plan to get this out
on the mail list soon (at least before next Tuesday's concall).  Do we
need a dateTime as a separate type?  Chuck and I had it as one of the
main attributes of all observations.  Does the dateTime have a special
meaning or can it be used for times on other other things (like when a
decision was made or when something was entered as opposed to when an
observation was made)?

The Attribute type has some interesting fields - negation, numericOp,
uncertainty, machineProb, userStatedProb, modifier, units, precision.  I
assume 'negation' deals mainly with a Value of type 'coded' and
'numericOp' deals with numerical types ('decimal', 'long1', 'long2').  I
believe the uncertainty/probability are important but I'm not sure what
the difference is.  I believe 'modifier' will be part of the name/value
pairs and/or a list of QualifiedCodes.  'units' of course will be dealt
with for numerical types.  The 'precision' concept also came up in
Richard's model for measurement quantities.  I'm not sure how it might
relate to accuracy in Ricahrd's model.

I presume EventActionSequence is out of scope for what we are doing?

BaseObservation has a value (obsValue) and can contain a set of other
observations (via commonMods and obsMods).  At this week's conference
call Richard indicated the GEHR and ECHR-SupA always have them
separate.  The expanded model we discussed in Denver also had them
separate.  On the other hand the BaseEvent is almost identical to
BaseObservation except it does not have a value and it contains EITHER a
set of other BaseEvents OR a set of BaseObservations.  The BaseEvent
seems to be similar to the GEHR 'Observation' and the BaseObservation
seems to be similar to the GEHR Health_Record_Item with the exception
that the Health_Record_Item does not recurse.

Another thing the Event Model has is the ability to define specific
structures for the events and observations.  This is similar to using
DTDs to define valid XML documents.  We have not discussed how to do
this for COAS except it was remarked that RDF should be used.


Can anyone more knowledgable with the model clear up any of these
issues.


Tim
begin:          vcard
fn:             Tim Brinson
n:              Brinson;Tim
org:            Protocol Systems, Inc.
adr:            8500 SW Creekside Place;;;Beaverton;Oregon;97008-7107;USA
email;internet: tim@protocol.com
title:          Systems Software Lead
tel;work:       503 526 4392
tel;fax:        503 526 4200
note:           <img src=http://aco.protocol.com/pids/tbrinson.jpg>
x-mozilla-cpt:  ;0
x-mozilla-html: TRUE
version:        2.1
end:            vcard