Semantic Annotation Functional Profile
In a diverse information environment, semantics must be used to clearly indicate the meaning of data. This requirement is expected to be addressed by the Semantic Infrastructure, although there will be a touchpoint between the caGrid 2.0 and the Semantic Infrastructure to annotate data with semantics.
Create annotations for better discovery and searching of artifacts.
This Functional Profile includes, but is not limited to, the following capability elaborations:
Derived From Requirements
- Gap Analysis::Collaborate::008 - Share models with others to allow collaborative annotation Share models with others to allow collaborative annotation
- Semantic Infrastructure Requirements::Artifact Management::Artifact Lifecycle Management Artifact lifecycle management and metadata requirements include the ability to: * Manage lifecycle, governance and versioning of the models, content and forms * Establish relationships and dependencies between models, content and forms * Determine provenance, jurisdiction, authority and intellectual property * Create represention and views of the information, realized through the appropriate transforms * Provide access control and other security constraints * Create annotations for better discovery and searching of artifacts * Develop usage scenarios and context for the information * Provide terminology and value set binding The artifacts are bound to the services via the service metadata. The service metadata combined with the artifacts and supporting metadata provide a comprehensive service specification. The artifact management requirements listed above are derived from the following use cases: * caEHR: The caEHR project has adopted ECCF for specifications and CDA documents for interoperability. The caEHR project requirements include the need for an infrastructure for managing all the artifacts generated during specification process, including HL7 models and documents. The caEHR project also intends to publish these artifacts for the community and vendors. The infrastructure needs to support better discovery, making all the relevant information available in the right context. * ONC and other external EHR adopters: ONC has adopted CCD and CCR for meaningful use. All national EHR implementations are expected to support forms and the semantics of these forms play a critical role in interoperability. The semantic infrastructure must provide a mechanism to create, store and manage these forms. * Clinical Trials: Clinical trials use forms to capture clinical information, and the semantics captured by these forms are critical for interoperability and reporting. The semantic infrastructure must provide a mechanism to manage the lifecycle of these forms.
- Gap Analysis::CDISC::CDISC-5 - Support group collaboration to harmonize data element definitions The primary CDISC use cases involve stakeholders/standards developers reaching consensus about their community data element definitions as they harmonize/normalize them as a set of common data elements. There is less focus on describing relationships among these data element definitions. The target consensus is one of HL7-type Normalization (different terms/definitions that mean the same thing are consolidated) and Harmonization (where similar terms are found to be conceptually distinct additional data element definitions are introduced. CDISC wants to start with N community definitions and for a single concept end up with one common data element definition. CDISC wants to gradually match multiple community data elements with a single CDISC common data element. Because a major goal of normalization is a single common data element, there is strong preference to avoid HL7-type localization. HL7 localization is based on community data elements that are not part-of the HL7 Reference Information Model (RIM) or the BRIDG (Biomedical research Integrated Domain Group) model. These data elements are not part of the standard. The BRIDG 3.01 Users Guide elaborates on these normalization, harmonization and localization definitions (pages 25-27). *Source * * 5/20/2010 Interview , David Iberson-Hurst
collaborativeAnnotation
Share models with others to allow collaborative annotation
collaborativeHarmonization
Support group collaboration to harmonize data element definitions
