search

who-fic / harmonized-cm

The prototype harmonized WHO-FIC Content Model for ICD, ICF, and ICHI
0 stars 0 forks source link

How to manage different classifications' references to the same conceptual entities in the Foundation? #15

Open samsontu opened 4 years ago

samsontu commented 4 years ago

ICD, ICF, and ICHI all have anatomical concepts, some of which are conceptually identical. ICD and ICHI also reference ICF concepts. Not only do they have different concept ids (codes and IRIs), some of them may have different definitions (e.g., in ICD, "Attention functions" is defined as "Because of your health condition, in the past 30 days, how much difficulty did you have in concentrating on doing something for ten minutes?" while in ICF, it is defined as "Specific mental functions of focusing on an external stimulus or internal experience for the required period of time." One approach is to define "mappings" among these concepts; another is to use owl:SameAs axiom to relate them.

samsontu commented 4 years ago

"WHODAS 2.0 36-item version” subtree in ICD-11 corresponds to the WHODAS 36-item survey instrument. If count the leaf nodes, this subtree has exactly 36 of them, and the “definitions” of these leaf nodes correspond to questions in the survey instrument. The Foundation children of WHODAS 2.0 36-item version (if any) should not be added.

I think there are two ways of handling the entries in the WHODAS 2.0 36-item version tree:

  1. Treat them as separate entities that are linked to the corresponding ICF classes, if such mappings exist.
  2. Identify them as ICF classes, but move what’s in the current “short definition” slot to a new slot (e.g., “assessment question”).

I lean toward the first approach, first because not all of the leaf node entries have corresponding ICF codes (e.g., time spent on health condition), second because it solves the problem of multiple parenting, and third because it makes issue of content merging moot. I think it’s better to model the questions in the assessment instrument uniformly, instead of having some of them ICF categories and some not. “Attention function question” (part of WHODAS 2.0 36-item version) would be different from “Attention functions” in Generic Function domains, thus we don’t have multiple parents in a classification.

The Generic functioning domains, on the other hand, I think, should be identified with ICF classes. (I assume they all came from ICF.)