The Measure.scoring value set includes several values:

1. These definitions use the name of the code in the definition; definitions should include description of the code and not re-use the code as an explanation of itself.  Definitions should come from their respective sections in the IG - Proportion from 3.4.3.1; ratio from 3.4.4.1; continuous-variable from 3.4.5; and "cohort" (see below) from 3.4.6.
2. "Cohort" is overused in that it is also a Measure.type. It is really about a population that references a set of actors meeting specific criteria for which specific data must be collected - I.e., somewhat of a "count" of all meeting criteria listing all supplemental data, but not a "score." The reason for the distinction is alignment with other definitions of measure scoring by National Quality Forum, CMS (CMS Measures Blueprint) and others - see attachment with analysis by Kathy Lesh (Battelle). A more appropriate scoring term would be more appropriate - suggestions include:
   1. Count - perhaps too limited
   2. None - I.e., not scored, just reported
   3. CohortList, CohortEnumeration (or something referencing Cohort)
   4. Enumeration

The goal is to attain alignment of terminology across the quality community using terminology understandable to technical implementers.