Open StijnDupulthys opened 1 year ago
This seems related to the discussion on post-coordination or interface terminology that has come up in several WGs (HS, ONC), etc. These examples could inform those discussions...
An unofficial set of conventions around customisation was presented by Melanie here: https://www.ohdsi.org/2021-global-symposium-showcase-18/
A few general guidelines based on that poster:
concept.standard_concept = NULL
)._source_concept_id
fields
_type_concept_id
do not have a equivalent source concept field. So we cannot use custom concepts for these.Themis discussed on 8/17/23, we have two separate issues:
Themis can and should give guidance on #1. The Vocab group and broader community will give guidance on #2.
Themis WG discussion 2023-10-06
General rules for creating custom concepts:
This can be documented on a new 'Conventions' page on the CommonDataModel Github.ui page.
This should also contain a reflection on when to create custom ( >2 billion) concepts and insert into Concept and Concept Relationship tables versus when to use the STCM. With pros and cons of both methods. Including advise on creating bi-directional relationships in concept_relationship table.
It is currently difficult to find clear documentation for a convention on how to use custom concepts (e.g. for internal use), as I mentioned on the OHDSI forum. Two example cases for which we couldn't find a convention:
Example case 1:
Example case 2:
(Our original, wrong, interpretation: we used our custom concepts as local 'Standard' codes, used them in the _concept_id columns and put normal (< 2Bilj) ids as their parents in the concept_relationship table; we thought this was the entire goal of the >2Bilj rule)