OHDSI Home | Forums | Wiki | Github

Relationship between RxNorm's Branded Pack and Clinical Pack concepts

I had assumed that just as concepts of class Branded Drug map to Clinical Drug, so would Branded Pack map to Clinical Pack. Was my assumption incorrect or am I misforming my queries?

I have tried two ways: using the “Maps to” relationship and the Ancestor to Descendent relationship.

Branded Pack mapped to itself and disavows Clinical Pack as a descendant.

The two work-arounds that I found are:

  1. Map using concept name: clinical pack’s name being a substring of the branded packs.
  2. As both are ancestors to their composite Clinical Drug concepts, map indirectly.


The relationship is called “Has tradename” and “Tradename of”. Ask the NLM for their choice of naming it. And yes, it is in the hierarchy. The Branded is a descendant of the Clinical, but the min_levels_of_separation between them is 0 (same semantic level).

Essentially, it is exactly the same as the relationships between the other Branded and Clinical concept classes.

1 Like

Thank you!

I see that I need to review the relationships between Branded Pack, Clinical Pack, and Clinical Drug.