Hi, does OHDSI offer libraries of clinically relevant definitions of diagnoses, procedures, and therapies? I’m hoping for something similar to AHRQ HCUP definitions. It seems like vocabularies might be too granular, and the phenotype library is focused more on diagnosis cohorts.
I do not think that this was ever the intention of OHDSI. There are notions of “standard” concepts, which represent superset of all meanings of concepts that could map to them, but maintaining their definitions is not within our scope. There are source terminologies that are considered clear enough to base our standards on them, and role of defining concepts is deferred to them.
SNOMED CT, which is a Standard terminology for most of diagnoses, procedures and therapies in OMOP CDM, maintains their own model to strictly define concepts by formal logic, but it is better to refer to source SNOMED files – by technical limitations they are not exactly represented in OMOP CDM model. SNOMED International Edition in particular aims to only include unambiguous concepts with clear undisputed definition, which is reflected in their editorial guidelines – but I am not aware if this claim was ever independently evaluated.
Hello! There is an ongoing project OMOP2OBO, with some materials already published.
Also, there is visible interest and some activity among some OHDSI members in integrating the Human Phenotype Ontology (HPO) with the OMOP Vocabularies 
1 Like
Hi Polina,
can you update on those activities to map HPO to existing OMOP vocabularies?
regards,
Alberto