Title |
|
|---|
Narrative description |
(Describe the inactivation scenario in a few lines)
have the same meaning. This may arise for the following reasons:be semantically equivalent but have subtle differences: - Identical FSNs with slightly different logical definition
- The FSNs have
|
The FSN has - different word order but the implied meaning is the same
- The FSNs contains word equivalents or an eponym
- Where an organism has multiple equivalent names e.g. common and scientific name
- The concept shares the same descriptions (synonyms) but the FSNs are slightly different
|
While the descriptions may be different - The FSNs are slightly different but the 2 concepts share the same modelling
|
The FSNs imply that the concepts are the same but the modelling is different- (implies one is primitive and one sufficiently defined)
- Identical FSNs but with a different semantic tag
|
Details |
Details
(Provide specifics about the scenario to support comparison to other scenarios) | What is being inactivated (concept/description/any component)? | The duplicate concept is being inactivated |
| What is the reason for inactivation (description)? | The 2 concepts are considered to be semantically equivalent |
| Which inactivation value should be used? | Duplicate component |
| Which historical association reference set should be used? | SAME_AS association reference set (foundation metadata concept) SAME_ASmeans A is semantically equivalent to B
|
Known |
issues(Describe any that may occur for this scenario and which may complicate interpretation of the inactivation) | - Establishing semantic equivalence is key and may be difficult. If there is doubt
|
consider using - use ambiguous as the inactivation reason.
- If the ancestors and descendants of the concept are inconsistent with what is implied by the FSN then inactivate as ambiguous.
- Ensure that the synonyms are appropriate and represented within the active concept.
- To reduce the impact on users/vendors, consider keeping the concept with the oldest effective date as this is likely to have had the most usage. Where the existing FSN for the older concept does not comply with current naming conventions, it may be possible to assign a newer and compliant FSN "in place" ie without inactivating the concept. However, if the newer concept already carries the ideal, compliant FSN then it will not be possible to also assign that same FSN to the older concept, and so there may be no other option than to inactivate the older concept in favour of the newer, with its better FSN.
- Where both concepts have subtypes
|
consider whether they add 'meaning' to the parent term and provide further evidence of semantic equivalence- ensure that they are all present as subtypes of the active concept.
- Where the
|
modeling - modelling indicates significant semantic difference establish whether these differences impact other concepts and analytics
|
Consider whether the following might be semantically equivalent:- . If there is doubt consider using ambiguous as the inactivation reason.
- Question: Where the FSN is the same but the semantic tags are: disorder and finding, procedure and regime/therapy and finding and situation is it acceptable to call these true duplicates?
|
xxx disorder and xxx disorder without yyy disorder
xxx disorder and xxx finding
on examination xxx and xxx finding
|
Examples | Simple Example | 145857006 Soft tissue X-ray abnormal (situation)
SAME_AS
168711005 Soft tissue X-ray abnormal (finding)235998001 Perinephric abscess (disorder)
SAME_AS
80640009 Perirenal abscess (disorder) |
| Complex Example | 136852007 Computer operator (occupation)
SAME_AS
8651002 Electronic computer operator (occupation)232141000 Cycloplegic paralysis of accommodation (finding)
SAME_AS
68158006 Cycloplegia (disorder) |
| Erroneous Examples | 312186009 L-Phenylalanine (substance)
SAME_AS
63004003 Phenylalanine (substance)274374000 Endoscopic surgical procedure (procedure)
SAME_AS
363687006 Endoscopic procedure (procedure)156240002 Primary postpartum haemorrhage (disorder)
SAME_AS
27214003 Atonic postpartum hemorrhage (disorder) |
Impact |
(Describe how specific stakeholders are affected by the inactivation) | | - Requirement to establish true semantic equivalence
- Ensure that the active concept has an FSN which adheres to editorial guidance
- Ensure that all of the concepts descriptions are appropriately assigned/reassigned or inactivated
|
|
|
| |
refsets- Refsets and ECL queries
- Where the developer makes extensive use of ECL, identify the impact of the changed modelling of the active component and loss of the concept implied by the modelling of the inactivated concept
|
| - Generally minimal, when the inactivated concept points to the duplicate.
- The change may require terminology merging or remapping
|
. One issue might be how the change affects the concept "synonyms".- of local Refsets.
- Recognise that any loss of descriptions which were deemed non-synonymous may impact accessibility
- Reinstate within the local edition descriptions which were inactivated because they were deemed to be region specific
|
Potential improvement
| No changes proposed |
Supporting resources
| SNOMED CT Editorial Guide guidance on creation of the Fully Specified Name | <comment> |
Metrics for historical inactivations | Usage over time 20020131 to 20200731 - 38,862 Most recent usage: - 20200731 - 312
- 20200131 - 274
- 20190731 - 330
- 20190131 - 357
| Link to table |
Review of historical inactivations | 100 inactivations reviewed | Error rate |
Potential improvement(Provide an indication of whether the current inactivation mechanism for this scenario is sufficient, or provide your ideas or thoughts on potential improvements) | Supporting resources(Provide links to any resources relevant for this scenario) | <url> | <comment>