Uploaded image for project: 'Other Specification Feedback'
  1. Other Specification Feedback
  2. OTHER-2124

STAMP may not be sufficient

    XMLWordPrintableJSON

Details

    • Icon: Change Request Change Request
    • Resolution: Considered for Future Use
    • Icon: Highest Highest
    • HL7 Logical Model: Standardized Terminology Knowledge Base (OTHER)
    • 1.0
    • Terminology Infrastructure
    • Chapter 3.1: Standard Class Model
    • Hide

      In Chapter 3 “Tinkar Reference Model”, Section 3.1 “Standard Class Model”, we added:In Chapter 3 “Tinkar Reference Model”, Section 3.1 “Standard Class Model”, we added:
      Not all terminology systems contain all the information recorded in STAMP, but defaults can be used in cases where it is missing.​ For example, SNOMED CT contains the Status, Time, and Module but do not distribute the Path or Author. Since most terminologies only release a Production path, the Path could be defaulted to Production Path and the Author could be defaulted to SNOMED CT Author.
      In Chapter 3 “Tinkar Reference Model”, Section 3.7 “Future Iterations”, we added:
      Additional metadata from standards like Dublin Core or FHIR that may not currently be supported with the current Tinkar Reference Model could be supported using Concepts and Semantics. However, further changes to the Tinkar Reference Model may be needed if they cannot be supported using the current model

      Show
      In Chapter 3 “Tinkar Reference Model” , Section 3.1 “Standard Class Model”, we added:In Chapter 3 “Tinkar Reference Model” , Section 3.1 “Standard Class Model”, we added: Not all terminology systems contain all the information recorded in STAMP, but defaults can be used in cases where it is missing.​ For example, SNOMED CT contains the Status, Time, and Module but do not distribute the Path or Author. Since most terminologies only release a Production path, the Path could be defaulted to Production Path and the Author could be defaulted to SNOMED CT Author. In Chapter 3 “Tinkar Reference Model”, Section 3.7 “Future Iterations”, we added: Additional metadata from standards like Dublin Core or FHIR that may not currently be supported with the current Tinkar Reference Model could be supported using Concepts and Semantics. However, further changes to the Tinkar Reference Model may be needed if they cannot be supported using the current model
    • Carol Macumber / Keith Campbell : 14 - 0 - 0

    Description

      Please present a comparison of STAMP with other metadata standards. Dublin Core, for example, includes elements like contributors, coverage (spatial or temporal), publisher, references (sources), rights, contacts, and more. FHIR include fields such as include policy, reason, and (for authors and contributors) on behalf of, and role. 

      Please also compare the proposed metadata fields with those in current terminology systems such as LOINC, ICD-10, and SNOMED. 

      Attachments

        Activity

          People

            Unassigned Unassigned
            Mark_Kramer Mark Kramer
            Watchers:
            2 Start watching this issue

            Dates

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: