- Many of the critiques of SNOMED CT stem from incorrectly modelled anatomy – Kent Spackman showed an OWL preview of the revised Anatomy model.
- The Anatomy redesign requires changes to the SNOMED CT model – addition of new logic: Sufficient definitions, General Concept Inclusions, role chaining and anonymous class axioms (e.g. any part of something that is lateral is also itself lateral).
- Other additions include surfaces, “skin of”, “subcutaneous tissue of”, “part of lateral half of”, and “bone tissue of” (p10).
Tuesday, January 14, 2014
The NEHTA Terminology Team Troop Off To Washington In October To Make Sure All Is Well On The Global Stage. Seems There Is The Odd Problem!
This appeared a few days ago.
Created on Thursday, 02 January 2014
The IHTSDO Conference Report October 2013 Meeting has been published.
The International Health Terminology Standards Development Organisation (IHTSDO) Conference Report provides summary information on the international activities and areas of work as discussed at the IHTSDO October 2013 Working Meeting held in Washington DC, USA. The report includes an update from the Content, Implementation & Innovation, Quality Assurance, and Technical Committees, the Substance Hierarchy Redesign Special Interest Group as well as the General Assembly and Member Forum.
Here is the link:
As you will see from the description some of the content is pretty specialist and heavy going.
What I was somewhat surprised by was the apparent instability of the current manifestations of SNOMED CT - some 12 years after it was finally released.
See here for all the history:
In my innocence I has imagined the basic designs and hierarchies for the terminology were settled and that adjustments were all at the edges.
Not so it would seem.
1. Regarding the Substance hierarchy redesign project
“Concerns about the ambiguity of many of the existing concepts were raised. As the Substance hierarchy doesn’t have a model at the moment, this ambiguity is a result of a mixture of poorly-chosen legacy terms and lack of standardised nomenclature for many substances. Completely replacing all concepts would have a large impact on both the modelling of other hierarchies and implementers. A pragmatic approach is required.” (p20)
2. Regarding Versioning.
“Dion McMurtrie (NEHTA) presented on identifying coding systems and versioning of the coding system in clinical documents. This topic had been raised previously with respect to HL7 messages and never reached resolution at the IHTSDO, with the IHTSDO deferring the issue to HL7. However the committee recognised that the IHTSDO should have a position on versioning SNOMED CT, particularly in relation to extensions, given that they are core to SNOMED CT. Work is to progress to define a draft versioning scheme for SNOMED CT for comment out of the URI specification work.” (p19)
3. Regarding Anatomy Redesign
So substance terminology (drugs), anatomy and version control are all under a lot of review!
15 years since all this started it is obviously nowhere near done. I wonder when?
Looks like the complexity of such endeavours has struck again and real sematic interoperability is as far away as ever!
One simple question has to be if it is still a work in progress how are those who are actually implementing affected? It must have some impact.
I hope the team are back and hard at it - seems like there is a fair bit to be done.
Posted by Dr David G More MB PhD at Tuesday, January 14, 2014