This page is under construction

SNOMED CT Editorial Advisory Group (AG) 

Teleconference via GoToMeeting

Attendees:

Chair: Jim Case (JCA)

AG members:

• Bruce Goldberg (BGO)
• Keith Campbell (KCA)
• Paul Amos (PAM)

Presenter: Toni Morrison (TMO)

Observers: Monica Harry, others 

Apologies: 

AG member Guillermo Reynoso (GRE)

Minute-taker: Juliet Gole Krarup, from a recording.

Welcome

JCA welcomed the group. He encouraged everyone (including staff and observers) to go suggest April face-to-face topics via the Discussions page in Confluence. 

Laterality

JCA noted that Robert Turnbull had added some comments about adding QA to the document, and there had also been some comments from Olivier Bodenreider from NLM, to which JCA would respond. 

As only one out of four AG members was on the call at that point (BGO), JCA deferred discussion on laterality and asked TMO to present on Product Strength.

Product Strength

TMO showed some slides and noted that she, JCA and Ian Green had gone back and forth on various options. 

Early in the presentation, JCA interrupted her to say that KCA and PAM had just joined. 

Slides:

On Option #3, JCA said non-human content was moved to an active, non-maintained extension.

KCA said he supported Option #4. Option #5, he said, that would not add new concepts was a bad idea. On option 4, the team could minimize the editing burden by using content from RxNorm. The VA had invested in programs that took RxNorm and transformed it into an extension to SNOMED. It could be automated, though with human QA, and build upon the maintenance already going on with RxNorm. 

JCA asked if the tooling took variability in the naming and transformed it into something regular. KCA replied no, but it took naming from RxNorm that was regular. NLM was okay with their being overlap so the VA was not spending time on reconciling overlap, but the VA could update the FSNs with an algorithmically-generated name that was consistent. 

KCA referred to the RxNorm webpage about how the naming convention involving strength and dose.

JCA agreed that automation would be an advantage.

KCA said the VA would be happy to collaborate bilaterally or multilaterally, although it was not involved in the IHTSDO drug model project because he did not have the ability to attend regular meetings. JCA asked if the drug modeling group was aware of the VA work. KCA said no, he had spoken to Dion McMurtrie and Michael Lawley but had not made a presentation to the group.

• TMO to invite KCA to present the VA RxNorm project to the drug modeling group.

PAM said that the majority of content demonstrated in TMO's presentation was from Read Codes v.2, which was based around branded products. HSCIC had abandoned that Read Codes v.2 drugs dictionary in favor of the dictionary of medicines and drugs from the UK. The only other group possibly still using the Read Codes v.2 was New Zealand, so he was hesitant about putting a lot of effort into dealing with concepts that may not be in use.

TMO said she had spoken to Jo Goulding and Emma Melush, and the UK had mappings to about 4000 concepts. PAM took an action to speak to Jo and Emma about it and report back.

• Paul Amos to speak to Jo Goulding and Emma Melush about the use of mappings to the drug concepts being considered in the drug strength project. 

TMO asked KCA if he viewed it as a 2-step approach. KCA said yes.

BGO asked how many of the drug concepts in question represented vaccines. TMO said she could send him an estimage.

TMO said the vision for the International Release/core was to include the active ingredient plus dose, but put strength elsewhere.

• TMO to revise the proposal document after getting input from Paul Amos about Read Codes v.2.

KCA asked if there was a clear consensus on option 4. PAM, BGO and JCA agreed that option 4 was the best option. 

Decision: The Advisory Group agreed that Option 4 was the best option for the Product Strength project.