"Microcephaly" should belong to Condition domain, not to the Observation

[dimshitc]

Microcephaly should belong to Condition domain, not to the Observation (I understand the peaks are all about Observation in this case, so the exclusion should be added)

[dimshitc]

same for 606633 Macrocephaly

[cgreich]

@dimshitc:

That's debatable. As such, the meaning is just "too big head" and "too small head". It's not any specific diagnosis.

What is the use case?

[dimshitc]

this is the source code mapped to this one http://www.icd9data.com/2014/Volume1/740-759/742/742.1.htm see Approximate Synonyms Brain hypoplasia, congenital Congenital brain hypoplasia Congenital hypoplasia of brain Hydromicrocephaly Microcephaly Primary microcephaly

so it´s not just a "too small head" but some brain hypoplasia.

No use case, I just reviewing the mapping changes affecting our CDMs. But people who work on on these conditions will be definitely confused.

[cgreich]

No use case no cry no more. :)

All of them are diagnoses. Except "microcephaly". Wouldn't you say? Maybe they mean "microcephaly of unknown origin", but then should say so.

[dimshitc]

Well, isn't it kind of late to fix the error in a vocabulary when there's a use case already? Use case driven approach works very well when developing new logic, but not when fixing things, I think.

[cgreich]

It's the other way around: Only when there is a use case the vocab needs fixing. Otherwise it is in vain.

But in this case the use case is not a use case: Just because some ICD9CM says something is a synonym it isn't. In fact, you are not expecting the above list to be synonymous (they are not, they are just telling coders what to put into that particular ICD9CM), you are using it as an argument that all these are conditions.

And they are. Except microcephaly. That is a "Finding of head circumference", almost a measurement. But again, they probably mean "microcephaly of unknown diagnosis". Which doesn't make it a condition. The "unknown" is the condition. SNOMED also has another idea: Microcephaly has an "Inactive possibly_equivalent_to active" relationship to Congenital microcephaly. Maybe you use that?

[dimshitc]

Yes, Maybe here's a problem with mapping as well: ICD9 I'm referring to should be mapped to Congenital microcephaly. And Congenital microcephaly should change it's domain to Condition.

[cgreich]

That sounds right.

[dimshitc]

Are you going to make these changes in the next release: ICD9 I'm referring to should be mapped to Congenital microcephaly. And Congenital microcephaly should change it's domain to Condition. ? @TinyRickC137 @Alexdavv

[TinyRickC137]

With all respect, most likely it will be done during the summer release