LOINC Table and Accessory Files (LOINC v2.68) have been successfully used to populate the HAPI FHIR JPA Server's Database (HAPI FHIR v5.1.0, FHIR R4) although not all the files were used, e.g., the OWL document ontology. Thanks. Lin Zhang, Taikang Insuance Group 12 months ago
Use casesPlease describe the specific use case(s) for which you have used or are planning to use the LOINC Document Ontology OWL file. Which of these use cases are currently in production?
We maintain a consumer-focused health ontology, modeled in SKOS and used for (among other things) tagging patient education content with relevant metadata. Wherever possible, we try to map our ontology to existing standards The LOINC Document Ontology is the only place I have found a controlled vocabulary of healthcare settings. Some of its other facets are useful to us, too, even though they cover the same domains as other standards. We have tentative plans to create concepts in our taxonomy that map directly to a subset of the "Setting" facet. Carl Burnett, Healthwise, Inc. 12 months ago
Focusing on the sub specialty of Emergency medicine, we get data extracts from many hospital systems and from multiple EHRs. The goal is to add the metadata and to structure data that is ingested for quality measures analysis. We are currently researching any database that will allow us to create scripting to capture the intent of the documentation for better analytics. Gregory Melitski, d2i 11 months ago
ImplementationHow users might implement the OWL document ontology. For example, would a local site build their own documents as "individuals" mapped to the LOINC classes? How would they plan to maintain that as new LOINC versions are distributed?
DesignWhat are your thoughts on the design of the distributed OWL model and how that model works for practical use and implementation?
FormatsOWL can be distributed in various formats, examples being "OWL Functional Syntax" or "RDF/XML". We have chosen to distribute in Owl Functional Syntax because that is the preferred format for other ontologies such as SNOMED. Do you have a preference?
The .owl extension is no longer supported by TopQuadrant's TopBraid EDG suite, which we use to manage our taxonomy and our content metadata tagsets. It would be preferable to have the ontology available as RDF/XML (.rdf) or Turtle (.ttl). Carl Burnett, Healthwise, Inc. 12 months ago
InferencesOWL files can be distributed "pre-reasoned" or "post-reasoned". The current file is (mostly) pre-reasoned, meaning that the use of a reasoning engine (such as in the Protege program) is employed for inferences. Any preference for pre-reasoned versus post-reasoned?