This page is for capturing the discussion around updating the workflow for value set definition creation.
Observations
- LexEVS model and implementation are more complex than requirements of most NCI value sets
- NCI Thesaurus may have enough assertions to adequately describe value sets without external modeling
Meeting Minutes
Value set requirements gathered through meetings with the NCI stakeholders. Minutes from the meetings are here:
- LexEVS Meeting Minutes - Value Set Architecture Planning Session - 2017.01.06
- LexEVS Meeting Minutes - Value Set Architecture Planning Session - 2017.01.09
- LexEVS Meeting Minutes - Value Set Architecture Planning Session - 2017.01.19
- LexEVS Meeting Minutes - Value Set Architecture Planning Session - 2017.02.21
- LexEVS Meeting Minutes - Value Set Architecture Planning Session - 2017.03.02
- LexEVS Meeting Minutes - Value Set Architecture Planning Session - 2017.03.27
- LexEVS Meeting Minutes - Value Set Architecture Planning Session - 2017.04.24
Requirements
Requirements for the new value set work flow architecture
Requirement | Priority | Notes |
---|---|---|
Better logging to help determine if there were any failures for resolving the 760+ value sets. | ||
Resolving all 760+ value sets should be able to finish over night (Rob). | ||
leafOnly=false
| 2017.04.24 VS Arch. Meeting |
Proposed or Possible Requirement | Priority | Notes | Is Requirement? (Yes/No) |
---|---|---|---|
Remove Dependency on value set definition files for NCIt defined Value Sets | There are still some value sets that need to be approached with the old value set method. | yes | |
Generate All NCIt sourced value set coding schemes from NCIt source in LexEVS (DB) | There are still some value sets that need to be approached with the old value set method. | yes | |
Generate value set URI from NCIt source based on source and hard coded structures. | - There is information of the agency is in the annotation on that concept. This information can be used to create the unique URI that represents the agency. | yes | |
(Browser) Auto generate value set definitions from the NCIT source |
| yes | |
Resolve discrepancies between number of value set definition files and value sets defined in NCIt | This is not necessary | no | |
Maintain value set functionality for those few value set definitions which define leafOnly as false | yes | ||
Provide acceptable substitutions for value set URI's and other metadata that is defined in the source (List in other rows as necessary) | yes | ||
Maintain Resolved Value Set Coding Scheme API as interface |
| yes | |
Provide concurrent value set loading capability | This was originally a suggestion on how to speed the load up. This could still be a possibility that we should look at going forward, | no | |
Provide programmatic access to value set definition XML files | We need efficient way to retrieve this day (Kim)
| no | |
Do we need to define A8 as an association each time | no | ||
(Browser) Provide efficient way to retrieve label (URI) and version of all resolved value set coding schemes |
| yes | |
(Browser) Efficient resolution of VS graphs as it pertains to hierarchies | Seconds | yes | |
(Browser) Efficient results to VS resolutions | sub second for most | yes | |
(Browser) Efficient retrieval VS definition metadata resolution calls. Faster queries against the definitions themselves. | 1 second or less | yes | |
(Browser) Efficient search by code or name - query for value set that this concept matches | This needs further definition/discussion with Kim. Kim's notes: Search value sets by code or name that matches with any member (concept) of a value set using a user-specified (exactMatch, startsWith, or contains) algorithm. | yes | |
(Browser) Source specific information - need to call LexEVS API for each vs Iterator without having to further query | Kim mentioned this when you click the value set button. Needs further definition and investigation. Kim's notes: Provide source specific value set resolution data through an iterator. Formats: (Case 1) Value sets with a non-NCIt default coding scheme (e.g., NDF-RT). Code Preferred Name Coding Scheme Name, Namespace
(Case 2) Value sets with a NCIt default coding scheme and has no non-NCI supportedSource, NCIt Concept Code NCIt Preferred Term NCIt Synonyms NCIt Definition
(Case 3) Value sets with a NCIt default coding scheme and has at least one non-NCI supportedSource (e.g., FDA), NCIt Concept Code Source Name (e.g., FDA Name) NCIt Preferred Term NCIt Synonyms Source Definition (e.g., FDA Definition) NCIt Definition
(Note: If there are multiple supportedSource, then use the first supportedSource.)
| yes | |
Build source (i.e., standards authority) view and terminology view of value set hierarchy efficiently | We need to understand the values and procedures needed to support this better | ? |
Discussion Points | Notes |
---|---|
Who are the stakeholders and end users of value sets | |
Define what work flow end user interface is (Shell script, Rest Service, Browser based GUI) | |
Define performance or other considerations require a move to triple store or OWL API (For Example: Do value sets need full OWL expressivity) In particular do we need reification for end users so that we can understand whether queries or API's need triple store or OWL API support. | 2017.04.24 VS Arch. Meeting - Gilberto and Larry would have to answer this question |
Will non NCIt sourced value sets continue to use legacy value set definitions? (more a scope statement question) | |
What considerations/requirements drive the development of an architecture that encompasses hierarchical value sets and new resolution mechanisms? | |
Create OWL source for some/all values sets from LexEVS api or other source? (OWL export of value sets) | |
What user needs around the report writer generate requirements for LexEVS or the LexEVS team | |
Does Excel spread sheet generation fall into the scope of LexEVS value set resolution or otherwise generate requirements for the LexEVS team | |
Do the users/stakeholders in the value set API have any new requirements beyond those already stated | |
What does it mean, in terms of requirements, to provide support for Neoplasm like value sets (Hierarchical) |