W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-hcls-coi@w3.org > April to June 2008

RE: An argument for bridging information models and ontologies at the syntactic level

From: Kashyap, Vipul <VKASHYAP1@PARTNERS.ORG>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 15:16:39 -0400
Message-ID: <DBA3C02EAD0DC14BBB667C345EE2D1240236D75B@PHSXMB20.partners.org>
To: <dan.russler@oracle.com>, "Ogbuji, Chimezie" <OGBUJIC@ccf.org>
Cc: "Dan Corwin" <dan@lexikos.com>, "Oniki, Tom (GE Healthcare, consultant)" <Tom.Oniki@ge.com>, "Samson Tu" <swt@stanford.edu>, <rector@cs.man.ac.uk>, <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>, <public-hcls-coi@w3.org>
 

	Ogbuji, Chimezie wrote:
	

		Dan,
		
		I've very familiar with the SOAP model.  The primary motivation
for my questions about assessment had more to do with distinguishing an action
from data that is derived from it.  This speaks directly to the problem of the
'anti-pattern' where ontologies for medical records are built *directly* from
models that were designed with data-level concerns in mind and thus semantically
inconsistent (so called "information models").
		
		The sense of assessment as used in this paper suggests that an
assessment is data (and thus appropriate to consider a diagnosis), but consider
that there are other senses of the word and one in particular is "the act of
judging or assessing a person or situation or event".  In the latter case, an
assessment refers to the act.  I was simply trying to tease out which of these
Tom had in mind.

	<danR> It is true that in traditional lab department systems, the 'data
from the assessment' was modeled separately from the 'assessment action.'  This
is not exactly "wrong." However, it was noted that one cannot deliver a "numeric
result" without restating the action that generated the result, e.g. serum WBC
is the action and serum WBC of 10,000 WBcells/ml is the result. In physical
sciences, it is considered good practice to always include the methodology of
the action when describing the data. Accordingly, it is best practice in the
science of healthcare to also report on the nature of the action itself at the
same time as reporting on the data derived from the action. 
	 
	[VK] It may be the case that one can model key properties that can
enable the accurate assessment of the action.
	For instance, one could model things like the property being assessed,
who is doing the assessment, the qualifiers of the assessment, etc. 
	The CEM approack followed by IHC seems to adopt this strategy. From what
I can see, there doesn't appear a need to model all the aspects of an action.
	 
	On the other hand, if there is indeed a need for more contextual
information related to the action of performing the assessment, it is probably a
good idea to
	model these two things separately and then link them via approporiate
relationships modeling the context, but this likely to happen in an application
specific manner.
	 
	Cheers,
	 
	---Vipul


The information transmitted in this electronic communication is intended only
for the person or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential
and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other
use of or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or
entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this
information in error, please contact the Compliance HelpLine at 800-856-1983 and
properly dispose of this information.
Received on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 19:17:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 16 April 2008 19:17:20 GMT