OHDSI Home | Forums | Wiki | Github

Using Hierarchical Ingredient Codes (HIC)


(Kristin Kostka, MPH) #1

A bit of naivety here around the wild west of drug vocabularies. I’m using a new data set that has drugs in Hierarchical Ingredient Codes. Scoping out how to standardize these data. I know this isn’t a formal supported vocabulary. I know that HIC contains information on specific ingredient, therapeutic class, pharmacological class, and organ system to which the drug is targeted. Seems like something could be done to map this but this is my first HIC rodeo.

Is anyone familiar with mapping HIC data to an OMOP supported vocabulary (e.g. NDC, RxNorm)? Any advice?

(Dmytry Dymshyts) #2

According to your words, lowest concept in this Hierarchy, is Ingredient. So you can map HIC ingredients to RxNorm Ingredients matching concept names. For a better matching you can use concept_synonym table.

Please let me know if it works for you or you need further assistance.

(Kristin Kostka, MPH) #3

Thanks @Dymshyts. This makes sense. My question is whether anyone in the community has done this mapping before. We’re trying to gauge if there’s any existing evidence around any shortcomings in this approach before we adopt it at scale.

(Dmytry Dymshyts) #4

Got it.
As you can see in Standardized Vocabularies for OMOP CDM there is no such a vocabulary,
but probably somebody made a custom mapping.

(Dmytry Dymshyts) #5

@krfeeney, actually, you can provide us with the official source of Hierarchical Ingredient Codes (HIC) vocabulary.
Then we can review it and make a decision of adding it to the Standardized Vocabularies.

@Christian_Reich, adding you to the thread.

(Christian Reich) #6


If you want to add a new vocabulary you just request it. That’s what you did. You are done. :smile:

Only problem: You are in a long list of change requests for a small team. If you want to accelerate you need to squeak as a wheel and give use cases why it is needed faster. If that’s not good enough, give @Dymshyts team some money and they do it right away.

(Kristin Kostka, MPH) #7

Makes sense. This is one of those theoretical arguments - trying to figure out upstream decisions about what non-standard vocabularies are worth supporting.

Appreciate all of the inputs @Christian_Reich and @Dymshyts. I too wish I had a few :moneybag: :moneybag: :moneybag: to move this one forward. :smile:

(Sam Wood) #8

Does anyone know where the team is at with adding this vocabulary?

(Dmytry Dymshyts) #9

Nothing is done yet.
Can you, please, share your use case?