What am I doing wrong?
I figure that I must be overlooking something painfully obvious, as there must be valid unit concepts in DRUG_STRENGTH.
I get the same results for amount_unit_concept_ID, numerator_unit_concept_ID, and denominator_unit_concept_ID.
2513 proc sql ;
2514 create table test as
2515 select distinct
2516 ds.amount_unit_concept_ID,
2517 c.concept_name
2518 from
2519 v5.drug_strength as ds inner join
2520 v5.concept as c
2521 on
2522 ds.amount_unit_concept_ID = c.concept_ID;
NOTE: Table WORK.TEST created, with 0 rows and 2 columns.
The DRUG_STRENGTH table is loaded. I get the concept codes out of it. I will re-check CONCEPT to see if I am looking at a truncated or otherwise problematic copy.
As I doubt the there have been many revisions to the units of measure since last year, as an interim solution, I will try to download UCUM alone from http://ftp.ohdsi.org/ and merge it into what I get from http://athena.ohdsi.org/vocabulary/list.
UCUM is not shown here, because it is uploaded by default.
You don’t see it in the vocabulary list, but you will see in the CONCEPT table.
I double checked this - uploaded some vocabularies, opened CONCEPT table, and I see the UCUM there.
Can you please download the package one more time and check. If you don’t have UCUM anyway, please forward me ( ddymshyts@odysseusinc.com ) the message from Athena with the link, so I can take a look on your vocabulary package.
The UCUM concepts were not present in the CONCEPT file being used here. When I ordered a new one, it was not listed on my selection menu. I learned this morning, from my colleague who received the new copy, that though not explicitly selected, it is present on the latest download.
I am curious as to why UCUM is not included on the menu, perhaps with a permanent check in its selection box. But that is just a curiosity for me. I don’t need an answer to that.
Because it is required by default, and we removed it from the list because it is one of many vocabularies that are small and mandatory, and listing them with a non-editable checkbox would make the page even longer than it already is. But I agree, we should make this more obvious.