Re: [TMO] patient record normalization

Just wanted to pick up on the follow-your-nose argument.

On 9/10/10 10:06 PM, "Eric Prud'hommeaux" <eric@w3.org> wrote:
> Right, but tells whom, and when? including :measuredInUnits advertises
> a flexibility which you do not intend to honor. If I dereference
> :systolicMPa, I learn that the units are exactly MPa.

How would you learn this? It seems like you are suggesting a person would do
the dereference and *see* a web page stating in a form that is not
machine-readable that the units are Mpa.  Otherwise, if the dereference is
meant to inform a machine, then wouldn't some machine readable format be
needed for this (i.e., an ontology or set of rules)?

> If I dereference
> muo:numericalValue and muo:measuredUnits, I learn that I can use any
> units (misleading).

No need to dereference.  muo-vocab.owl  tells the machine all it needs to
know about measuredIn, for example:

uomvocab:measuredIn
   a owl:FunctionalProperty,
   owl:ObjectProperty;
   rdfs:domain uomvocab:QualityValue;
   rdfs:range uomvocab:UnitOfMeasurement.

In particular, it tells the machine that only one unit can be associated
with the domain and that the relationship holds between quality values and a
unit of measurement.  In what way is this misleading?

> If I wade through the OWL for TMO, I learn that
> there's a restriction for say:
> 
>   Class: tmo:BloodSystolicPressureReading EquivalentTo:
>         (:value exactly 1)
>          and (:measuredInUnits exactly u:mmHg)
> 
> which, if I think hard, tells me that I must normalize my data, but
> this is pretty far from follow-your-nose semantics.

Yes, it is far from follow-your-nose semantics because it requires logical
deduction to interpret whereas follow-your-nose only requires the lowest
common denominator: (opportunistic) network lookup.  Is there a need to
follow-your-nose if the (raw) data was meant for machine consumption, is
rich in meaning, and clearly indicates the artifact to use in interpreting
it logically? 

> I think I have described why authoring is less fault-prone if the
> normalized date in TMO uses precise predicates. Do you have other use
> cases which override that one?
> 
>> m.
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>>>> Also, having domain-independent predicates makes it easier to
>>> render
>>>>> a view
>>>>>> of the data (for human consumption) that includes visual cues
>>>>> regarding the
>>>>>> units of measures associated with values directly from the data
>>> since
>>>>> such
>>>>>> tools will always expect the same set of terms to capture a value
>>> and
>>>>> its
>>>>>> unit of measurement.
>>>>> 
>>>>> If you've bought the argument for early normalization, isn't it
>>>>> needlessly dangerous to offer the freedom to express BP in mmHg in
>>> an
>>>>> ontology that's required to have BP in MPa? It does put more burden
>>> on
>>>>> the use of generic data browsers (they'd have to read the OWL in
>>> order
>>>>> to present the user with units), but I think that use case is small
>>>>> compared to the cost of data consumption.
>>>> 
>>>> I don't think we should tailor our data model to generic data
>>> browsers - they are far too simple for the complex knowledge that we
>>> have to represent.
>>>> 
>>>> m.
>>> 
>>> --
>>> -ericP


===================================

P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

Cleveland Clinic is ranked one of the top hospitals
in America by U.S.News & World Report (2009).  
Visit us online at http://www.clevelandclinic.org for
a complete listing of our services, staff and
locations.


Confidentiality Note:  This message is intended for use
only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed
and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable
law.  If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient or the employee or agent responsible for
delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If
you have received this communication in error,  please
contact the sender immediately and destroy the material in
its entirety, whether electronic or hard copy.  Thank you.

Received on Saturday, 11 September 2010 17:34:11 UTC