Stream: australia
Topic: CodeSystem URL assignments
Brett Esler (Apr 04 2017 at 03:53):
As part of the AU-base IG terminoloy usage (http://build.fhir.org/ig/hl7au/au-fhir-base/terminology.html) there are ANZSCO and ANZSIC code systems defined; currently these have been drafted with ABS references for their system URLs. For ANZSCO there is also the alternative METeOR reference which could be used http://meteor.aihw.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/523811 which references the ABS set - would there be a preference for ABS or METeOR for the URL for the CodeSystem?
Brett Esler (Apr 04 2017 at 03:54):
ANZSIC does not appear to have an entry referencing the entire content in METeOR - so we should use the ABS reference?
Richard Townley-O'Neill (Apr 04 2017 at 05:41):
Do you intend the links at pages like http://build.fhir.org/ig/hl7au/au-fhir-base/ValueSet-anzsco.html to be different to the printed text?
For example http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/1220.0 actually points to http://build.fhir.org/ig/hl7au/au-fhir-base/CodeSystem-codesystem-anzsco.html
Richard Townley-O'Neill (Apr 04 2017 at 05:49):
On the choice between ABS and METeOR, I think that it is better to refer to the owner of the classification (ABS) rather than the register of usefulness in Australian healthcare (METeOR), as long as the owner can supply a useful web address, which I think the ABS does. So I prefer the ABS.
Grahame Grieve (Apr 04 2017 at 10:34):
I'd prefer the one we already assigned (if there's no clear reason to change)
Michael Lawley (Apr 13 2017 at 01:22):
I've just had reason to look in METeOR for a gender code system / value set and found:
1. Person -- sex, code A (http://meteor.aihw.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/602450)
2. Person -- sex, code N (http://meteor.aihw.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/287316)
3. Person -- sex, code X (http://meteor.aihw.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/635126)
3. has status 'pending', 2 is the most popular but only a 'candidate' for DoH (since 2015), while 1 is 'standard' for DoH (earlier date)
Any tips on how to choose the "right" one? Should there be ConceptMaps to convert between them (and SNOMED equivalents)?
Grahame Grieve (Apr 15 2017 at 20:21):
certainly can define concept maps. I don't know which is the 'right' one. @Donna Truran might have some insight
Donna Truran (Apr 15 2017 at 20:37):
@Michael Lawley and I discussed this. IMHO Person-sex-code A and person -Sex-code X are 'special cases', needed by fewer users. Go with the most popular and we might (evenutally!) get a default consensus standard. This also reduces the burden of producing and maintaining concept maps (or extensions) for everyone, everywhere and the effort is imposed on just those users who have those particular 'edge case' requirements. Then the broader community would only need ONE concept map between person-Sex-code N and SNOMED. Just as an aside, Meteor needs some cleaning up, for internal consistency purposes, and to help drive developers toward standards that help interoperability (given this single example, it looks more like a smorgasbord menu - pick one, any one).
Grahame Grieve (Apr 15 2017 at 21:48):
so worth adding concept maps between FHIR adminstrative gender and "N" and between "N" and SNOMED-CT to the Australian FHIR base IG? And maybe mapping to SCT for the FHIR Admin gender to the base spec?
David McKillop (Apr 16 2017 at 11:16):
FYI @Donna Truran , @Grahame Grieve , @Michael Lawley , @Michael Legg - in the updated HL7 Australia Orders and Observations "Australian Pathology Messaging - Localisation of HL7 Version 2.4" uses "Person -- sex, code N (http://meteor.aihw.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/287316)" in PID-8 "Administrative Sex", which by Donna's comment above is the appropriate code. If not please let me know.
Richard Townley-O'Neill (Apr 18 2017 at 22:52):
METeOR seems to be replacing its sex concepts.
1 The data element - concept Person—sex (http://meteor.aihw.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/269716) has been replaced by http://meteor.aihw.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/635233
The new data element - concept, 635233, has only two data elements, an A and an X, but no N, they are
Person—sex, code X http://meteor.aihw.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/635126
Person—sex, text X[X(99)] http://meteor.aihw.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/636038
This suggests that METeOR is moving towards a X-based system (string) rather than an N-based (integer) system
Richard Townley-O'Neill (Apr 18 2017 at 22:59):
The new data element concept (635233) seems to be part of a project to clearly separate sex and gender.
The old property was sex (http://meteor.aihw.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/269231)
and the new properties are
sex (http://meteor.aihw.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/635230) and
gender (http://meteor.aihw.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/635957) which has the data element Person - gender, code X (http://meteor.aihw.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/635994)
The values for sex and gender are the same, the concepts are different.
HL7 CDA seems to capture gender rather than sex.
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
