Any definitions of the Collection Types?

General
1

Is there any definitions of the Collection Types?

export const COLLECTION_TYPES = [
  'Dictionary',
  'Interface Terminology',
  'Indicator Registry',
  'Value Set',
  'Subset',
];

Github Source

Thanks

2

Hi @forest!

I can provide informal definitions of these, but in reality this is just an example of potential collection types and has no effect on behavior in OCL’s API or user interface.

  • Dictionary: A comprehensive collection of concepts that includes terms, definitions, and metadata. These typically provide the meaning and usage of terms within a specific domain e.g. a clinical concept dictionary for use at the point of care.

  • Interface Terminology: A specialized set of standardized terms designed to facilitate human-computer interaction. It bridges the gap between everyday language used by humans and the structured vocabulary needed by computer systems, making technical concepts more accessible to users.

  • Indicator Registry: A centralized repository of standardized metrics or measurements used to evaluate performance or track progress. Each indicator could include a clear definition, calculation method, and often metadata about its proper use and interpretation.

  • Value Set: A defined collection of specific coded values or terms that are valid for a particular data element or field. Value sets constrain the allowed values to ensure data consistency and interoperability when exchanging information between systems.

  • Subset: A smaller, specialized collection derived from a larger terminology set, containing only the concepts relevant to a particular purpose, domain, or use case. Subsets are created to simplify implementation or focus on specific terminology needs.

1 Like
3

@jamlung Wow, that’s great! Thank you so much! Maybe we need to include these definitons in an OCL-specific terminology.

Previously, interface terminology was the most confusing one for myself. Because the source Columbia International eHealth Laboratory (CIEL) looks like NLM UMLS Metathesaurus.

BTW, indicator registry reminds me of ISO 11179 MDR, and HL7 FHIR resource Library and HL7 CQL.
And subset seems to be relevant for SNOMED CT RefSet.

1 Like
4

Yeah, that’s an interesting thought! We do have some OCL-specific terminologies here, but we don’t have a source for Repository Type where we can populate and manage definitions.

@askanter is a thought leader in this. Andy, do the definitions above feel adequate to make them more OCL official? Any potential concerns or additional repo types that you foresee? I didn’t find anything in FHIR to borrow from.

This also may affect the upcoming Repo Types initiative that @jon is helping us lead if we were to make a Repo Type source.

5

I don’t really have anything to add beyond what Joe has already provided. We don’t really have a use case for differentiating. Interface terminology is not necessarily UMLS-like. It can be simply mapped to another reference terminology and is not a semantic web. UMLS is useful for searching of the medical literature but not for deterministic mapping to reference terminologies.