RE: Survey of *consuming* apps that make use of Schema.org's medical/health vocabulary

Hi Dan & Tiffany ,

As a domain expert in medical diagnostics  I'm  frequently puzzled by the
lack of expressiveness of the terms used in the health-lifesci vocabulary.
However, this is also true for other vocabularies and ontologies. 

So, we are working on a highly expressive  IVD reference model that shall be
unambiguously interpretable and trustworthy. This model is to be used in the
daily practice of healthcare workers. The high granularity will hamper the
general use in the public domain.

 

Instead, we are considering to use the definitions of official governmental
(IVDR, MDR)  and institutional documents as a framework for tagging general
subjects.  

 

You can contact me if you are interested in this initiative.

 

Best Regards

Frans 

 

dr. Frans A.L. van der Horst

Clinical Chemist

Skypename:  semantoya

 

'If Silontologies are combined as such, this will lead to Babylontologies'



 

 

 

 

Van: Chris Regan <cregan@thematix.com> 
Verzonden: zaterdag 25 januari 2020 18:04
Aan: Andre Perreault <andre_perreault@richards.com>; Dan Brickley
<danbri@google.com>; public-schemed@w3.org
CC: Tiffany Jann <tjann@google.com>
Onderwerp: Re: Survey of *consuming* apps that make use of Schema.org's
medical/health vocabulary

 

From MedicalOrganization to MedicalIntangible, MedicalCondition to
hasHealthAspect, MedicalAudience to just MedicalEntity and even
HealthTopicContent, et al., I've made/led extensive use of this invaluable
Schema.org vocabulary for Healthcare providers.

Cheers,

Chris

----
Chris Regan

cregan@outlook.com <mailto:cregan@outlook.com> 

cregan@thematix.com <mailto:cregan@thematix.com> 

Irvine, CA

(949) 600-0364 (Mobile)
(949) 484-9667 (Google Voice)

 <https://www.linkedin.com/in/christophermregan/> LI |
<https://edmcouncil.org/page/fibocontentteamsv2> FIBO |
<https://blog.dbpedia.org/> DBpedia |
<https://w3c.github.io/json-ld-syntax/> W3C JSON-LD 1.1

live:cregan (Skype)

 

  _____  

From: Andre Perreault <andre_perreault@richards.com
<mailto:andre_perreault@richards.com> >
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2020 8:48 AM
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com <mailto:danbri@google.com> >;
public-schemed@w3.org <mailto:public-schemed@w3.org>  <public-schemed@w3.org
<mailto:public-schemed@w3.org> >
Cc: Tiffany Jann <tjann@google.com <mailto:tjann@google.com> >
Subject: Re: Survey of *consuming* apps that make use of Schema.org's
medical/health vocabulary 

 

We've applied Provider and Medical condition schema over the past few years.

 

Provider schema does appear in search results as a knowledge graph.  

 

 

 

 

.................................................

Andre Perreault
Brand Media

 

THE RICHARDS GROUP
2801 North Central Expressway

Suite 100

Dallas, Texas 75204-3663

 

Work 214-891-7759
andre_perreault@richards.com <mailto:andre_perreault@richards.com> 

 

richards.com

 

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com <mailto:danbri@google.com> >
Date: Wednesday, January 22, 2020 at 9:24 AM
To: "public-schemed@w3.org <mailto:public-schemed@w3.org> "
<public-schemed@w3.org <mailto:public-schemed@w3.org> >
Cc: Tiffany Jann <tjann@google.com <mailto:tjann@google.com> >
Subject: Survey of *consuming* apps that make use of Schema.org's
medical/health vocabulary
Resent-From: <public-schemed@w3.org <mailto:public-schemed@w3.org> >
Resent-Date: Wednesday, January 22, 2020 at 9:24 AM

 

 

Hi folks

 

I am investigating the deployment status of the schema.org
<http://schema.org>  medical vocabulary. This is a call to see who is making
any use of the vocabulary in significant use-facing applications.

 

The medical/health vocabulary was added back in 2012, and then cleaned up
somewhat by folks here. In all that time I have not become aware of any
significant application that consumes (i.e. uses) schema.org
<http://schema.org>  data based on this vocabulary.

 

(fwiw, at Google, we have not found the vast majority of the detailed
medical terms to be useful for Search.)

 

To be clear, this does not reflect poorly upon the work that was done here
to fix some of the problems with the original design. I think it is rather
that Schema.org made a mistake by adding such a massive set of vocabulary
terms without motivating use-cases. Much of the vocabulary (see
https://health-lifesci.schema.org/) is poorly suited for use in the public
Web, both in terms of levels of detail and also because many of the terms
look more applicable to private data residing patient record systems where
other more widely used data standards already exist.

 

I suggest we partition the medical/health vocabulary into a smaller set of
terms that are aligned with Schema.org's strengths (e.g. simple public
information in the Web), and that most of the rest that are not being used
should be moved to the "Attic" area of schema.org <http://schema.org> . 

 

Schema.org also periodically encounters problems with the names chosen for
the medical types and properties. My colleague, Tiffany Jann (cc:'d) has
prepared an initial list of terms
(https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/2435) that have been used for
medical concepts in a way that is problematic for schema.org
<http://schema.org> 's wider usability. Again, if there are significant
medical/health uses of these terms, please let us know in this thread.

 

Thanks for any information,

 

cheers,

 

Dan