Automated Characterization of Health Information at Large-scale Longitudinal Evidence Systems (ACHILLES) - descriptive statistics about a OMOP CDM database
What would it take to enable this within Achilles and the new achilles_result_concept_count table? I'm willing to prototype the changes and submit a pull request - but need some guidance on Achilles naming standards.
It looks like it may be fairly straight forward. For example, for Conditions, analysis_id 400 is for "Number of persons with at least one condition occurrence, by condition_concept_id". It would be easy to create a comparable script for condition_source_concept_id. A similar approach can be used for measurement, observation, etc.
However, what is the right numbering system for a new analysis_id? For conditions, it would be in 400 range, but can an arbitrary number like 440 be picked (so that a suffix of 40 can be used for all core tables)?
Several posts have asked for patient counts for non-standard concepts: https://forums.ohdsi.org/t/patient-counts-on-non-standard-concepts/18143 https://forums.ohdsi.org/t/record-counts-and-patient-counts-on-non-stand-concepts/18174 https://forums.ohdsi.org/t/tip-achilles-rc-pc-drc-dpc-counts-in-atlas/17758/2 And my organization would benefit from this too.
What would it take to enable this within Achilles and the new achilles_result_concept_count table? I'm willing to prototype the changes and submit a pull request - but need some guidance on Achilles naming standards.
It looks like it may be fairly straight forward. For example, for Conditions, analysis_id 400 is for "Number of persons with at least one condition occurrence, by condition_concept_id". It would be easy to create a comparable script for condition_source_concept_id. A similar approach can be used for measurement, observation, etc.
However, what is the right numbering system for a new analysis_id? For conditions, it would be in 400 range, but can an arbitrary number like 440 be picked (so that a suffix of 40 can be used for all core tables)?