@Christian_Reich and others, I would like to revive a question for hopefully a final time.
I believe it has been firmly established that if a concept is not standard by default, its standard mapping should be no more than one hop away via the concept relationship table and the "maps_to" record type. We have a local member of the OHDSI community who implemented a depth first search through the graph and found that a good amount of concepts that are used in our EHR/OHDSI implementation are found further away than expected. (two-three hops)
1. If a concept is not one hop away should we be making choices on our own by traversing the graph? Medicine and/or clinical terms are not procedural so we worry that the search mechanism may lead to poor choices. As @cukarthik mentions we may be stumbling into a certain amount of semantic drift.
- We would be happy to list the concepts based on frequency if you are interested. If some concepts that are indeed further away than expected this list may help your team to address unexpected holes in the vocab.
Either way, your direction is greatly appreciated,