Standardization of observation from survey data or social history in EHR is what I needed for a long time. In Korea, many hospitals want to convert their health examination data into CDM, too (@whk) . Main obstacle for this is mapping social and medical history.
So, I absolutely agree with @MPhilofsky 's idea!
And I want to add some of my opinions or questions about observation mapping:
The dose unit for amount of alcohol should be standardized, too
In Korea, many survey asks ‘how many cup of ‘soju’ do you drink?’. ‘soju’ is Korean local alcohol. So, I converted the dose unit for alcohol history into ‘unit of alcohol’. I think the dose unit for alcohol history about wines, beers and whiskeys should be standardized for future research, too.
The concept_id I used
I would be not easy to read, but I mapped some social and medical history of Korean national survey data(here).
The below is the concept_ids I used for social history:
40766929 How many cigarettes do you smoke per day now [PhenX]
40766930 On the average of the entire time you smoked, how many cigarettes did you smoke per day [PhenX]
40766364 How many cigarettes per day do, or did, you smoke [PhenX]
Alcohol
40771103 How often do you have a drink containing alcohol [SAMHSA]
3037705 Alcoholic drinks per drinking day - Reported
Exercise
4036426 Frequency of exercise
2.history of previous medical condition vs. family history:
the current SNOMED concept_id for family history has both concept_ids for ‘No FH’ and ‘FH’
(eg, concept_id=4053372, concept_name= No FH: Hypertension
vs
concept_id=4050816, concept_name = FH: Hypertension)
But it is not easy to find ‘has no history of medical history’ for previous medical conditions
eg, Is there any concept_id for ‘no history of cerebrovascular accident?’( concept_id =4077982, concept_name= History of cerebrovascular accident)
So I applied different strategy for mapping medical history(only existence of medical history is stored) and family history(existence and non-existence of family history are stored)? I think 'without history’is also quite important information. I think this should be standardized, too!
do you have any CDM data representation problems, for example, some entity has Values or results, but you can’t repesent them as it’s a Condition or Procedure?
Yesterday, the measurement subgroup of Themis group had a phone call. Some people volunteered for various iteams on our todo list.
I volunteered for measurement concepts and units. If your site would like to help with the effort, we hope to base it on real world data. See the beta network study at this link:
In Korea, as growing number of hospitals is joining the OHDSI, we’re trying to make some ‘standard measurement set’. I expected we can make a set of about 300 measurements, which have clinical or academic importance. And then we will unify the concept_id and unit in Korea OHDSI network for this measurement set.
How do you think about this idea?
Furthermore, I’m converting echocardiography data into OMOP-CDM (to measurement table, of course). I’ll share the concept_ids I used in this work.
Just wondering what the meeting plan is moving forward? I saw discussion of another F2F meeting in California after the new year but I didn’t see if the date had been finalized. Are we only doing F2F meetings for the large group and then meeting in the focus groups separately? I saw that focus group #3 had a meeting yesterday but it doesn’t look like the other focus groups have met yet. Are there plans for the other groups to meet as well?
Putting that information on the wiki would be extremely helpful. In the meantime could we post the meeting information here so folks that want to contribute don’t miss the next round of meetings?
[quote=“DTorok, post:73, topic:3141, full:true”]
Where I can find the meeting schedules and call in information for all the Themis groups?
[/quote] It is my question too. Where did the THEMIS category go?!
Over the weekend @jon_duke pointed out that no WGs have categories, instead should use as hashtag. @Christian_Reich & I agreed so @admin removed it.
@jon_duke said it so nice via email I’ll quote him here:
I would like to suggest that the group consider rolling this back into the CDM Builders category rather than a standalone category. The Discourse platform (our Forum software) has a pretty strong bent towards lumping over splitting, which took me some getting used to when we first got it stood up. Essentially, the principle is that as many people as possible should be exposed to discussions around potentially relevant topics. This increases engagement, awareness, and potential new members in the groups.
So we’ve avoided having WG specific forums (except it seems the Method Evaluation Task Force slipped through when I wasn’t watching! :)). You can add a Themis tag to your posts (tag entry is right above the Create Topic button). I would not worry about showering THEMIS discussions upon the unsuspecting public— we enjoy seeing the work that is happening!
Sorry, I wasn’t exactly sure how to communicate it earlier and was planning on just waiting till the next team meeting - but you beat me to it!.
Does anyone know how to hashtag a thread after it has started?
Still looking the times and connection information for the various Themis working groups. Then link provided by @gregk had the meeting schedule for group 2, but I do not see when the other Themis groups meet.
@ericaVoss Click on the Topic title and you can add a tag to an existing topic by clicking on the ‘pencil’ icon next to the title at the top of the page.
I’ve now added the themis tag to the themis themed topics that I found in search (including this one).
@ericaVoss you should be able to click on the topic (thread) title (scroll up to the top of the page) which should then show the pencil icon and then you can add the tag to it.
Sounds like you may be trying to edit an individual post which wouldn’t be allowed if you didn’t create it.
