The purpose of this page is for team members to list 5 - 10 concepts which they have found difficult/impossible to allocate to a current inactivation reason/association type. These should be recorded within the comments box below, one comment box to each team member.
Where possible please annotate each of the concepts within your list with the reason why you found it difficult to choose an inactivation reason.
Many thanks, Paul
13 Comments
Krista Lilly
I had a procedure concept that had literature only from the 1950's; the procedure had failed repeatedly and was subsequently abandoned from being performed. When I inactivated the concept, the Outdated inactivation reason would require a replacement. What replacement concept should be used in a situation like this (or does it make sense to require one)?
Jim Case
Krista Lilly, I think we need a bit more info on this. There are a couple of options based on the particulars of the procedure.
Krista Lilly
I'll post concept IDs for any new ones I run across. This scenario was from memory, but I don't remember the procedure.
Toni Morrison
General comment - in the Medicinal product hierarchy, we would have liked to have had the option to use Non-conformance with editorial policy (for concepts that were out of scope) in combination with the Possibly equivalent to historical relationship (1 or more but generally only 1).
Nicola Ingram
Many complex issues including initially to decide if Ambiguous concepts (ambiguous can have multiple replacement targets, also ambiguity issues of abortion disorder v abortion procedure) v Outdated with a single replacement also discussion around what Outdated means in this context (e.g. are these outdated terminology concepts: abortion, also legal and illegal abortion) and whether to create new replacement concept(s). Decision to inactivate the yellow atrophy concepts as outdated e.g. 5792004 |Legal abortion with acute yellow atrophy of liver (disorder)|and point to parent 609454008 |Induced termination of pregnancy complicated by acute necrosis of liver (disorder)| without creating replacements.
Krista Lilly
Furthermore, there is a note in the Editorial Guide that 609454008 |Induced termination of pregnancy complicated by acute necrosis of liver (disorder) is to be inactivated because the two notions in the concept should be expressed separately in the medical record. Disorder Combination Modeling
Farzaneh Ashrafi
Hi Paul Amos
I cannot remember any specific concepts at this time. However, I can think of a couple of hypothetical scenarios that may require further consideration:
Thanks,
Farzaneh
Suzanne Santamaria
Hi Paul Amos,
Here are some examples of concepts which will be inactivated in the near future:
Monica Harry
Here is an example:102471002 |Absence of therapeutic response (finding)| vs 266721009 |Absent response to treatment (situation)|
I want to inactivate the former as dup to latter. Can I say that when one is finding and other a situation. Both concepts are dated 2002... so can't really use outdated. In my mind, this should be erroneous or non-conformance with a note and replacement.
Jim Case
In this case I would make them duplicates as a situation is just a finding with the context made explicit.
Monica Harry
Thank you, I have done so and forgot I had put this note here so created a GC ticket that Paul Amosanswered in accordance with this.
Monica Harry
Hi Paul,
Not sure if you are still looking for examples but check out these very similar concepts all meaning same procedure but worded differently. It illustrates the difficulty authors face and why even with good guidance, choices may be varied. And although they mean the same, I would not want to use them as synonyms...
Having been charge nurse in a chest hospital, (Scots folks are plagued with chesty conditions!) I am very familiar with this procedure but here is a good definition just in case for those not familiar: https://www.merckmanuals.com/professional/pulmonary-disorders/how-to-do-pulmonary-procedures/how-to-do-thoracentesis
KEEP THIS although not the oldest, point others here - 709787009 |Thoracentesis using computed tomography guidance (procedure)| - this is modelled correctly with Pleural cavity
Maybe keep this but am not convinced... 417911000 |Computed tomography and aspiration of chest (procedure)| - is this the same as CT guided or 2 separate procedures?
Inactivate - 440497001 |Percutaneous aspiration of thorax using computed tomography guidance (procedure)| - I want to inactivate as ambiguous and point to CT guided Thoracentesis 709787009 and not create another term. It is ambiguous since the procedure is an aspiration of the pleural cavity.
Inactivate - 16551341000119105 |Puncture aspiration of lung using computed tomography guidance (procedure)| - modelled with Lung structure so could argue it is duplicate to the Thorancentesis.
thanks, Monica
Paul Amos
Hi Monica Harry, many thanks. Always looking for examples.