Why would a standard concept_id change to non-standard without mapping? If the concept is standard, then it can be utilized in OHDSI research. As a non-standard concept_id without a mapping to a standard concept, it can’t be utilized. This change seems detrimental to OHDSI research. See the highlighted row below
Hi @MPhilofsky!
I added the answer in F.A.Q. here.
And you’re right, but we’re strongly dependent on the vocabularies we adopt.
We have one workaround that we apply to some vocabularies. We even can bring more zombies if people wish.
But the right way to fix the problem of the life-cycle is to recreate them in RxNorm Extension / OMOP Extension, and then decide if we want them as Standard and place them into the right place in the hierarchy. The same comes to ICD - there’s more and more intentions, so probably one day you’ll find it Standard. But right now it’s a lot of work, so both are not on the roadmap - read here.
Agree 
However, I wonder if we should keep them standard until they can be added to the appropriate OMOP vocabulary? This way they can be used for network research. I think many researchers who don’t have access to the raw, source data won’t know what they are missing. Especially if they follow the OHDSI way and only search for standard concept_ids in one of the tools.