Superficial bite wound of [site] without infection (disorder) - v1.0

Hi Jim Case, should we create a new parent concept injury without infection for this model? It might not be accurate to assert that all bite wounds are superficial injury though 80% dog bites are superficial. The depth of injury can also be deep or medium. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3800583/   

If we want to be specific for superficial injuries, the option is to use 37205004|Superficial wound (morphologic abnormality)|. The 'bite morphology' can be replaced to align the model with the superficial injury. However, many of the existing bite wounds might not be suitable because their FSNs have not indication whether the wound is superficial or deep.

Yongsheng Gao, you are absolutely correct about infected wounds not always being superficial. In this case, however, all of the affected concepts are "insect" bites.  I am not keen on creating any "without" templates or concepts.  My impression is that these all came from ICD-9 as subtypes of 910.4 Insect bite, nonvenomous, without mention of infection.  These concepts do not exist in ICD-10 (while bite with infection does exist).  So, we have a couple of options.  Inactivate as OUTDATED and point to the parent term or just leave it as it is and not worry about the existing concepts, but not adding any new ones.

Alternatively, we can use IS A "Disease" and morphology of "Superficial bite wound (morphologic abnomality).  Either way, all of the current concepts are superficial, it is the without infection aspect that makes it either SD or primitive

Hi Jim Case, I have updated the morphology to 37205004|Superficial wound (morphologic abnormality)|. This template would cover the existing concepts without any additional work. I also added rules for descriptions because 'superficial wound' is not required for descriptions. If you are okay, we can make this ready for implementation.

OK, ready for implementation....How do we move this into the queue?