OHDSI Home | Forums | Wiki | Github

Body height and weight concepts for Patient-Reported data

Hello, everyone.

For the last several years, I have used OBSERVATION_CONCEPTs to convert weight and height information filled out by patients on mobile Health app. Those information can be filled manually or automatically synched with apple health app or android device. Since that information is coming from patients’ testimonial not from the measurement performed by medicals, at that moment, I thought that is has to be mapped different from the information written in EMR records.

Previously used concepts are;

However, the OBSERVATION_CONCEPTs used recently become non-standard and moved to MEASUREMENT domain, so I have to re-map patient-filled weight and height information.
In that case, there are two ways of mapping those information.

  1. Using the same MEASUREMENT_CONCEPT with EMR body weight and height data, but using different TYPE_CONCEPT_ID.

Weight: 3013762 | Body weight measured | LOINC
Height: 3036277 | Body height | LOINC
Using TYPE_CONCEPT_ID as 32865 (Patient self-report) for PGHD.

  1. Using totally different MEASUREMENT_CONCEPT_ID from EMR body weight and height data

Weight: 40765046 | PhenX - weight - self reported weight protocol 021502 | LOINC
Height: 40765044 | PhenX - self reported height protocol 020704 | LOINC

Which one seems to be better idea?
Hope many of you answer to my concern.

Hello, @sumnemo. Concept Athena is still standard and valid, so in can be used further.
As for deprecated concept Athena it can be replaced by Athena which is standard and valid

Thanks. @dmitry.buralkin

Though I know that the deprecated concept can be replaced by the new concept using standard relationship formed within Athena, the point is that I’m not sure about using the same MEASUREMENT concept for PGHD data with EMR data.

Few years ago, I attended the seminar and heard that MEASUREMENT table usually contains the reliable data come from medical experts and/or tests. That was why I firstly choose OBSERVATION concepts for PGHD Ht. and Wt. data before being deprecated. PGHD Ht. and Wt. data are based on patients’ testimonial, so it is hard to believe that data is truly measured right. Therefore, my first thought for remapping was plan 2) using totally different OMOP concepts for PGHD data from EMR data, especially using the concept written as ‘self reported.’

On the other hand, there are other people who think that it is okay to use the same MEASUREMENT concepts with EMR data, because it could be differed by using different TYPE _CONCEPT_ID.

It is hard to say which way of mapping is right.
I just want to hear other opinion from this Forum.

@sumnemo, I suppose that relying on patient’s testimonial on weight and height could be OK

Hello, @sumnemo

I think your understanding of CDM is quite profound and both decisions are fine.

Now it only depends on how you are going to use your data and whether it creates any confusion if both measurements are mapped to the same concept_id.

Personally, I would proceed with types, because they are neat. However, option 2 may be more self-explanatory and probably causes less confusion.


For height and weight I would not worry about the quality. The patients know how tall they are, and they also weigh themselves. No need for a skilled physician or nurse. Things are different when they report, say, the drugs they are using. But the Type concepts have the purpose of providing the provenience information. There is no stated quality difference between MEASUREMENT and OBSERVATION, even though a lot of junk tends to end up in the latter.

This is how we distinguish the provenance of the data. Every row of clinical data in the CDM has a *_type_concept_id field to identify the provenance. The researchers can use this field to include or exclude different provenances of data depending on their study. Per the CDM conventions, “This field can be used to determine the provenance of the Measurement record, as in whether the measurement was from an EHR system, insurance claim, registry, or other sources.”.

@Christian_Reich is correct.

The difference between these two tables is “The MEASUREMENT table contains records of Measurements, i.e. structured values (numerical or categorical) obtained through systematic and standardized examination or testing of a Person or Person’s sample. The MEASUREMENT table contains both orders and results of such Measurements as laboratory tests, vital signs…”

While the Observation table contains “Any data that cannot be represented by any other domains