Changes between Version 58 and Version 59 of LEGACY - i2b2OntologyCRC-1

Timestamp:

02/24/11 11:13:07 (13 years ago)

Author:

jeff.lusted

Comment:

--

LEGACY - i2b2OntologyCRC-1

@@ -159 +159 @@
 I think this makes sense, but please differ if you find a better explanation. [[br]]
 
-First of all it's interesting to note that patient information can/is duplicated across patient_dimension and observation_fact tables. My reading of the situation is that the entry 'DEM|RELIGION:jewish' in the fact table is '''''identical''''' with the 'jewish' entry in the patient_dimension table. The patient_dimension table has the value in column named RELIGION_CD which in effect replaces the name-space 'DEM|RELIGION:' which prefixes the value in the observation_fact table. So I would argue these are identical. The code_lookup table in column CODE_CD is using the full name-space qualified code. For human readability (for reports etc) the value to use is in the NAME_CHAR column. [[br]]
+First of all it's interesting to note that patient information can/is duplicated across patient_dimension and observation_fact tables. My reading of the situation is that the entry 'DEM|RELIGION:jewish' in the fact table is '''''identical''''' with the 'jewish' entry in the patient_dimension table. The patient_dimension table has the value in column named RELIGION_CD which in effect replaces the name-space 'DEM|RELIGION:' that prefixes the value in the observation_fact table. So I would argue these are identical. The code_lookup table in column CODE_CD is using the full name-space qualified code. For human readability (for reports etc) the value to use is in the NAME_CHAR column. [[br]]
 
 It appears the code_lookup table is just what it says. It allows data to be stored in coded form but displayed (when required) in human readable form.