- From: Chimezie Ogbuji <ogbujic@bio.ri.ccf.org>
- Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2006 18:09:24 -0500 (EST)
- To: w3c semweb hcls <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
During the teleconference before last we had decided to take a first shot at a W3C note on the problem statement for computer-based patient records. I had preferred that we develop literature with guidance towards solutions in this space as I think the problem statement is well defined (at least with regards to the functional requirements needed to support healthcare and life sciences). It seems to me that best practices and the development of vocabularies to provide guidance to others in our community is one of the core tenants of our charter. I think if there is a challenge in this regard it is the development of uniform core vocabularies that span 'from the bench to the bedside' in concert with our efforts to demonstrate bench to bedside solutions - not so much the problem statement in general. By uniform vocabularies I don't mean a patchwork usage of ontologies that model biomedical reality but have little to no connection to patient-oriented healthcare information. I also think we can go a step further from conccneus that HL7 RIM (as an OWL ontology) has well-known ontological issues. The availablity of well established foundational ontologies (both within and across domains) reduces the problem to an exercise in ontology engineering at most (IMHO). It seems to me that concensus in this regard is long. So, for some time I've been developing (essentially) a foundational ontology for patient medical records which uses the Problem-oriented Medical Record model as a guide for how concepts in the realm of healthcare information (well modelled by HL7 RIM) can be grounded in both a domain-agnostic foundational ontology (DOLCE) as well as foundational ontologies for clinical terminology (GALEN) - both of which are freely available. In addition, I took the oppurtunity to attempt to resolve some of the well articulated ontological failings of HL7 RIM (by being explicit about the concept of the action of recording clinical information and the phenomena being described by such recordings). I've put up a Wiki that attempts to capture the motivation and rational for the ontology as well as links to the vocabularies that were used. There is also a link to the OWL / Protege files as well. Best case scenario, I'm hoping the interest group adopts it as a foundation for expressing concepts from the realm of patient medical records (as an alternative to using HL7 RIM OWL exports as such a foundation). Otherwise, I'm hoping to at least facilitate some conversation on how we can contribute towards some concensus on medical record vocabularies through the use of OWL and foundational ontologies - since such a contribution falls squarely under our charter. http://esw.w3.org/topic/HCLS/POMROntology Chimezie Ogbuji Lead Systems Analyst Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery Cleveland Clinic Foundation 9500 Euclid Avenue/ W26 Cleveland, Ohio 44195 Office: (216)444-8593 ogbujic@ccf.org
Received on Saturday, 2 December 2006 23:09:37 UTC