Date: 2022-09-26
Time:
1030 - 1200 PDT
1730 - 1900 UTC
1830 - 2000 BST
Zoom Meeting Details
Attendees
Chair:
AG Members
- John Snyder
- Feikje Hielkema-Raadsveld
- Matt Cordell
- Monique van Berkum
- James R. Campbell
- Jeffrey Pierson
- Paul Amos (ex officio)
Invitees
Observers
Apologies:
Meeting Files:
| View file | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Meeting minutes:
The call recording is located here.
Objectives
- Obtain consensus on agenda items
Discussion items
| Item | Description | Owner | Notes | Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Call to order and role call | This meeting is being recorded to ensure that important discussion points are not missed in the minutes. The recording will be available to the SNOMED International community. Joining the meeting by accepting the Zoom prompt declares that you have no objection to your comments being recorded |
| |
| 2 | Conflicts of interest and agenda review | None noted. | ||
| 3 | Welcome new members | Jim Case | Welcome to the new members of the EAG: Feikje Hielkema-Raadsveld , John Snyder , Matt Cordell We would like to express our gratitude for the service of our departing members Keith Campbell and Jeremy Rogers and for Alejandro's contributions as an ex-officio member. | |
| 4 | Reevaluating "History" vs. "Past history" situation concepts | Jim Case | Currently, most "417662000 |History of clinical finding in subject (situation)|" concepts (~1000) are modeled with a TEMPORAL CONTEXT of 410513005 |In the past (qualifier value)|. The exceptions are "Family history of X" concepts. While this makes sense in the context of procedures, it is not so clear with clinical findings. In many cases clinical history involves conditions that are both current and in the past (e.g. history of cough for last 10 days). While we have a few concepts that specifically state "Past history", for the most part History of clinical findings represent conditions that were in the past and do not represent ongoing clinical conditions. It is recommended that these concepts be remodeled with a new TEMPORAL CONTEXT, either the existing 410511007 |Current or past (actual) (qualifier value)|, or a new "Current and/or past (qualifier value). As this change is more general than the current modeling, it should ahve have no impact on the taxonomic structure of the hierarchy. Discussion: Decision: | |
| 5 | The need for "duplicate" findings and disorders | Jim Case | We have examples of clinical findings and disorders that have identical modeling, and in some cases have identical descriptions. An example brought to our attention is that of "Inflamed joint" vs. "Arthritis". These are modeled identically and 3723001 |Arthritis (disorder)| has the additional description of "Joint inflammation". During internal discussions it was commented that there is a need to distinguish between observations made during clinical exam and those that represent a "diagnosis". Other examples include 281795003 |Inflamed tonsils (finding)| vs. 90176007 |Tonsillitis (disorder)|; 298170003 |Knee joint inflamed (finding)| vs. 371081002 |Arthritis of knee (disorder)|, etc. Some proposed use cases were nursing findings, and the "need" to differentiate a finding on observation vs. diagnosis. However, we do not have a comprehensive representation of this pairing of findings and disorders in SNOMED CT. This impacts where specific descriptions may be applied; for example, we would not put the description "Inflammation of knee joint" on the concept 371081002 |Arthritis of knee (disorder)| (which is currently the case), since it would be more appropriate for 298170003 |Knee joint inflamed (finding)|. There is considerable inconsistency in the current content, for example there is 298171004 |Ankle joint inflamed (finding)|, but no "Arthritis of ankle". Q: Is there a need to maintain this distinction and, if so, where should it be applied? Discussion: Decision: | |
| 10 | AOB | EAG | ||
| 11 | Next meeting | EAG | SNOMED Business meeting Monday Sept 26. | |
...