OHDSI Home | Forums | Wiki | Github

New OBSERVATION_TYPES?

CDM Builders
#1

@Christian_Reich,

The OMOP Vocab currently has these OBSERVATION_TYPES:

45905771 Observation Recorded from a Survey 38000276 Problem list from EHR 38000277 Lab observation numeric result 38000278 Lab observation text 38000279 Lab observation concept code result 38000280 Observation recorded from EHR 38000281 Observation recorded from EHR with text result 38000282 Chief complaint 43542355 Referral Record 44786633 HRA Observation Numeric Result 44786634 HRA Observation Text 44814721 Patient reported

However @clairblacketer and I would like to request two more:

Procedure Observation
Condition Observation

We want to use these for records that would have gone into CONDITION_OCCURRENCE or PROCEDURE_OCCURRENCE but because of their DOMAIN_ID end up in OBSERVATION.

What are your thoughts?

How to Determine Event Type Concept when Vocabulary Maps to a Different Domain
#2

I would not recommend adding those new types. If we’re talking about a
claims database, then the origin of the data is from an
inpatient/outpatient medical claims diagnosis codes and/or procedure
codes. In which case, the existing _TYPE values, as they are used for
CONDITION and PROCEDURE domain should be used in the OBSERVATION table when
the _CONCEPT_ID has that domain.

@Christian_Reich, I think it was recommended on another thread, but perhaps
as a CDM convention, we should consolidate all _TYPE values into one
domain, and then all _TYPE fields in the CDM tables can use any TYPE,
rather than having types delineated by domain?

#3

@Patrick_Ryan - When data got moved we were associating it to a _TYPE that was appropriate for the table. So I’m guessing by your comments that _TYPE does not need to be the ones associated to the table?

I think your idea is nice because that will reduce the amount of types we need.

#4

Hello all,

I am working with a claim database and having the same problem with choosing observation_type_concept_id for observations coming from diagnoses and procedures source fields. In the current vocabulary release, there are the same concepts as Erica mentioned above.
@Christian_Reich I would appreciate to hear your opinion on 3 questions

  1. In the case if there is no appropriate observation_type_concept_id, can we populate it with 0 value?
  2. Which observation_type_concept_id would you recommend to populate for Observations coming from diagnoses and procedure source field?

Or can we populate _TYPE values from other tables?

#5

@IYabbarova

Well, what is it you want to say? We can add the Type Concept. What @Patrick_Ryan didn’t want is a Type Concept that overwrites the domain assignment of a concept. Doesn’t mean you can’t have Type Concepts if they are legitimate.

Like which? It doesn’t matter which table they come from, but in which circumstance during the healthcare utilization of the patient they were captured.

Like what?

t