Page tree

200 View 2 Comment In discussion Comments enabled In the category: Undefined

10756101000119107 |Group B streptococcus infection in mother complicating childbirth (disorder)| is stated as a child of 32801000119106 |Infectious disease in mother complicating childbirth (disorder)|, which makes it a descendant of 40733004 |Infectious disease (disorder)|. However, it has an acceptable synonym of "Group B streptococcus carrier in childbirth". So, carrier of B streptococcus in childbirth = to infection of streptococcus B in childbirth. Normally a carrier of a germ isn't an infection by that germ. It's a finding of a risk of infection, here a risk of infection to the baby not to the mother actually.

When you look at the carrier concepts, these are children of 66598005 |Infectious disease carrier (finding)| which are descendants of 105724001 |Disease related state (finding)| and not children of 40733004 |Infectious disease (disorder)|.

Should the modelling of 120001000119107 |Group B streptococcus carrier complicating pregnancy (disorder)| be revised and is it medically ok to have 'carrier' as a synonym of infection for 10756101000119107 |Group B streptococcus infection in mother complicating childbirth (disorder)?

Contributors (2)


  1. Hi Katrien Scheerlinck 

    You are correct in this needed change.  If you submit a CRS request, the Content Team will look at amending this concept.  Thanks for bringing this to our attention!

  2. Currently the subtypes of 66598005|Infectious disease carrier (finding)| are modelled the same an "infection", with the addition of "interprets=General clinical state" (which doesn't really say anything, and inherited form much further up the hierarchy).

    I feel like we need a "pathologic process" less specific than infection to represent this... something like "colonised".
    Because arguably these concepts ARE infections. They're asymptomatic (as opposed to symptomatic) infections. (Which is probably a better FSN for these)
    See:  699433000|HIV carrier| - does this person have an "HIV infection"?

    Symptomatic infections are also "carriers" too...

    There was a discussion years somewhere about commensal organisms and pathogenic organisms, and parasitism.

    I wonder if this was perhaps the orginal intention of the "pathologic process heirarchy"? With "parasitic process" being a subtype of "infections process".
    "Infection"==colonised. "parasitism" == harm to the host.
    The current use of a different process (parasitic) for subset of organisms (parasites) - has always seemed like a tautology.