Stream: IG creation
Topic: Mapping Logical Models to StructureDefs
Jose Costa Teixeira (Aug 18 2020 at 07:30):
In some IGs, we will have a Logical Model representing the data needs. This LM will be implemented in a Questionnaire and in some profiles.
What is the best way to do the mapping between the LM and the different resources?
- A separate ConceptMap ?
- using ElementDefinition.mapping ?
- Questionnaire.item.definition ?
Jose Costa Teixeira (Aug 18 2020 at 07:31):
the idea is to use this for lineage and change control - when we change something in the model, we should see what needs to be changed in the profiles
Grahame Grieve (Aug 18 2020 at 07:34):
best way in what respect?
Jose Costa Teixeira (Aug 18 2020 at 22:02):
If there are those 3 ways to do the mapping, and considering that the purpose is to track one element in the LM to its implementation in physical resources, I wonder if anyone is doing that, or how should we.
Grahame Grieve (Aug 18 2020 at 22:14):
well, it depends on what you want to achieve with the mapping
Grahame Grieve (Aug 18 2020 at 22:14):
I'm used 3 approaches:
- ElementDefinition.mapping
- ConceptMap
- StructureMap
Each has different strengths and weaknesses
Jose Costa Teixeira (Aug 18 2020 at 22:16):
impact analysis I think is the most important. When the requirements change (and so does the logical model), what do we need to change in the spec? when a data element is classified as "sensitive", are the corresponding elements in the profiles also classified?
Jose Costa Teixeira (Aug 18 2020 at 22:17):
also, "when we change from R4 to R5, what do we need to change?"
Jose Costa Teixeira (Aug 18 2020 at 22:17):
how do you use conceptmap? the concepts are the element ids?
Grahame Grieve (Aug 18 2020 at 22:19):
yes. that's formally documented somewhere in the spec
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
