Date
2019-08-28
1700-1830 UTC
1800-1930 BST
1000-1130 PDT
GoToMeeting Details
Topic: SNOMED EAG Conference Call
Time: Aug 28, 2019 10:00 AM Pacific Time (US and Canada)
Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android:
https://snomed.zoom.us/j/941587975
Meeting ID: 941 587 975
International numbers available: https://zoom.us/u/aNKqXbcBe
Observers:
Apologies:
Meeting Files:
Meeting minutes:
Objectives
- Obtain consensus on agenda items
Discussion items
| Item | Description | Owner | Notes | Action | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Call to order and role call |
| ||||||||
| 2 | Conflicts of interest | None. | ||||||||
| 3 | Approval of minutes from April 2019 Business meeting | Edited transcripts are located here |
| |||||||
| 4 | Device project update |
| ||||||||
| 5 | ECE update | Bruce Goldberg |
| |||||||
| 6 | Observables update | Daniel Karlsson |
| |||||||
6 | Clinical core content identification | Jim Case | At the April London business meeting, it was determined that an approach to the identification of the recommended content of the proposed clinical core be determined by a set of both inclusion and exclusion criteria. Agreed inclusion criteria:
Exclusion criteria include:
Discussion: Additional high level exclusion criteria | |||||||
| 7 | Findings/disorders and notes from the ICBO conference | Jim Case | Following a panel discussion at the ICBO conference in Buffalo Aug 1-2, an agreement in principle for SNOMED to collaborate with the OBO community was reached. Much of the discussion revolved around the current representation of diseases as subtypes of clinical findings. There is a clear, mutually exclusive separation in BFO and other disease ontologies based on BFO between "diseases", which are specifically dependent continuents and clinical observations (i.e. findings), which are considered occurrents. The challenges in implementing this notion in SNOMED is explained in https://www.academia.edu/26897896/Scalable_representations_of_diseases_in_biomedical_ontologies. As we had initially discussed, one differentiating feature of what we are calling findings is the notion of temporality, i.e a findings is made at a point in time (an occurrence) whereas a disease is persistent. This is similar to the notions in BFO, but they (and all other disease ontologies) refer to diseases as dispositions (i.e. a realizable entity that is manifested as some abnormal process or structure. For terminologies like SNOMED that do not seek to define diseases, but to identify when a realization of the disease disposition occurs in a patient, this logical representation breaks down. At the ICBO conference, a paper was presented in which an attempt was made to "BFOize" ICD-10. It was clear to the authors of that paper, the conundrum we face, i.e. that the use of the terms in ICD-10 as dispositions was not appropriate because they had been realized and so they modeled their ICD-10 ontology as processes (i.e. occurrents). This was savaged by the rest of the ontologists, but there was no practical solution to the need for representation of realized dispositions in clinical recording. Regardless, it would be of some benefit, in light of our desire to resolve the findings/disorders issue, to attempt to align as closely as possible with top level ontologies. One area where this would be of great use is the move by SNOMED to improve coverage of genomics. This would be greatly enhanced by an ability to integrate with the genome ontology. A draft document is being developed by members of the MAG as a response to the issues surrounding the lack of alignment between SNOMED and BFO: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HcBj5bVIg8lB_uyORZU9A_FWKFsw0sxmB6Xg4UYKygk/edit Discussion: | |||||||
| 8 | ||||||||||
| 9 | ||||||||||
| 12 | Next meeting | EAG |