Page tree




Relevant Documents

  File Modified
Microsoft Powerpoint Presentation Semantic_InteroperationofLab.pptx 2019-Jun-07 by James R. Campbell
Microsoft Word Document Lab_Description_logic_queries.docx 2019-Jun-07 by James R. Campbell
ZIP Archive 2019-Jun-07 by James R. Campbell
Microsoft Word Document LOINC-on-OWL specifications_20190927.docx 2019-Sep-27 by James R. Campbell


  1. For agenda Monday, I wish to report presentation to the lab LOINC committee yesterday with proposal for support of LOINC-on-OWL.  I enclose presentation I made, lab observables DL queries and SNOMED CT inferred OWL file with LOINC tech preview supplemented by Nebraska build of pathology observables.  This will be subsetted for LOINC-on-OWL proposal which I will be providing back to the LOINC community asap.


  2. What is the status of this collaboration ?

  3. I just uploaded a proposal for formatting of LOINC-on-OWL that I submitted to Dan Vreeman and Swapna A- for review.  I am hoping for response by LOINC leadership and we are currently preparing a release for their evaluation.


  4. HI Vojtech

    Can I suggest if you want to find out more about the proposal Jim is referencing, you attend the sessions he is doing in Kuala Lumpur at the SNOMED International meeting.


  5. Where should I post a question about a possible SNOMED mapping for a LOINC system that has not been mapped yet? I'd like to get a mapping for \{system\}, which appears to be used only for record artifacts such as comment and information source.

  6. Hi Feikje, the LOINC work is on hold for the moment, and for some time now, still your question is still valid. We have a discussion section on the Observables space, but here is fine, though the visibility is limited.

    Do you have examples where "system" would be used? I'm speaking mainly from NPU experiences, but here I think the two terminologies are the same. The system system is (mostly??) used to indicate that any (reasonable) system is allowed, or that a system is not really needed. Remember that both LOINC and NPU are based on a metrology model applied to all and everything. If there has to be a system and there is no relevant system, then the system system is used. There is another aspect of the system system at least in NPU and that is that it's an indication the the actual information about the system is to be found elsewhere within the message/structure, e.g. in a panel header or in a specimen slot in the information model. Mapping of "any system" would could be to e.g. Substance/Body fluid or similar. Mapping if it's an indication of information elsewhere is likely more difficult.

    1. Hi Daniel, I tried to start a discussion but for some reason, I wasn't able to - maybe there are more permissions to obtain?

      Anyway, I guess 'a system is not really needed' would be the correct interpretation. For 'any reasonable system allowed', I would expect system XXX, which corresponds to Specimen in SNOMED. But a comment is not done in any specimen at all, I should think.

      Based on the LOINC concepts I found with this system (there seem to be exactly 2 and no more), record artefact would apply. But I'm a bit uncomfortable with that because that sounds rather more specific than 'system'. I can't really think of any better candidate though, unless we go for supervague and map it to 138875005 |SNOMED CT Concept|...

  7. I am also not able to add any new discussion items on this workspace and most other workspaces. I wish SNOMED International would tweak the privileges to correct level.