I am working on running an end to end scenario between HL7 CDA and openEHR. For the very said reason I have performed ontology mappings of the two standards ontologies for the mapping file to be generated. Other than the mapping file, I found few concepts of HL7 CDA schema to be mapped with openEHR concepts. The list of the mappings are (Left hand side are HL7 CDA concepts while right hand side concepts are of open EHR)
Author equals Related Party
CDA Code equals Archetype Details
CDA ID equals UID
CDA Title equals Name
Custodian equals Participation
Data Enterer equals Party Reference
Patient Role equals Role
I need validity of the mappings, if anyone can evaluate the mappings and if wrong kindly guide me by providing me correct counterpart entities. I would also like guidance from an expert for validity of future mappings as well. I will be grateful for support in this regard.
2. CDA Code equals "Document Type" - no direct RM attribute
It could be
a) Hard-wired into transforms from openEHR documents
b) Represented as a an archetyped node in a COMPOSITION Report archetype
c) Carried as a term Mapping on the Document Name i.e
Composition/name/mappings/code_mapping ..
3. CDA ID equals COMPOSITION/UID .
4. CDA Title equals COMPOSITION/name (as DV_CODED_TEXT)
5. Custodian equals
Participation or
COMPOSITION/context/health_care_facility or COMPOSITION/composer
6. Data Enterer equals CONTRIBUTION/version/audit/commiter
7. Patient Role equals Role
Regards,
Ian
Dr Ian McNicoll
office +44 (0)1536 414 994
fax +44 (0)1536 516317
mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859
skype ianmcnicoll
ian.mcnicoll@oceaninformatics.com
Clinical Modelling Consultant, Ocean Informatics, UK
openEHR Clinical Knowledge Editor www.openehr.org/knowledge
Honorary Senior Research Associate, CHIME, UCL
BCS Primary Health Care www.phcsg.org