Minutes of caDSR Content Administrators Meeting

**July 2, 2007, 3:00 -- 4:30 p.m.**

+-------------------------------------+--------------------------------+
| **Attendees**                       | **Organization**               |
+=====================================+================================+
| ######### Robinette Aley            | NBMDP                          |
+-------------------------------------+--------------------------------+
| ######### Alice Birnbaum            | NIDCR                          |
+-------------------------------------+--------------------------------+
| ######### Jenny Brush               | Scenpro                        |
+-------------------------------------+--------------------------------+
| ######### Brian Campbell            | EMMES                          |
+-------------------------------------+--------------------------------+
| ######### Janice Chilli             | SAIC                           |
+-------------------------------------+--------------------------------+
| Mary Cooper                         | SAIC                           |
+-------------------------------------+--------------------------------+
| Tommie Curtis                       | SAIC                           |
+-------------------------------------+--------------------------------+
| ######### Kathleen Gundry           | SAIC                           |
+-------------------------------------+--------------------------------+
| ######### Larry Hebel               | Scenpro                        |
+-------------------------------------+--------------------------------+
| ######### Amy Jacobs                |                                |
+-------------------------------------+--------------------------------+
| ######### Jocelyn Leatherwood       | SAIC                           |
+-------------------------------------+--------------------------------+
| ######### Gavin Lindsey             |                                |
+-------------------------------------+--------------------------------+
| ######### Brenda Maeske             | SAIC                           |
+-------------------------------------+--------------------------------+
| Dianne Reeves                       | NCICB                          |
+-------------------------------------+--------------------------------+
| Daniela Smith                       | BAH                            |
+-------------------------------------+--------------------------------+
| Nicole Thomas                       | MSD                            |
+-------------------------------------+--------------------------------+
| Denise Warzel                       | NCICB                          |
+-------------------------------------+--------------------------------+
| John White                          | TerpSys                        |
+-------------------------------------+--------------------------------+
| Claire Wolfe                        | TerpSys                        |
+-------------------------------------+--------------------------------+

**1. Updates**

**a. Data Standards Status**

BMI data standard was approved. The BSA small group will meet one more
time to review the calculation rule.

> **b. Review of Existing Data Standards**

Dianne Reeves reported that the three teams are continuing to look at
the standards and will develop guidance on how to modify the current
data standards. Daniela reported that the teams will meet again next
week and they would have their final recommendations presented to the
VCDE on July 12 and 26.

> **c. Prioritize Next Data Standards**

Dianne said that they wanted to accelerate the progress. The next
candidates should be based on what the community considers important.
Tommie Curtis showed a document with the status of the current
standards. Tommie said that person titles and person relationships and
education levels are ready to present. Dianne said that next items
already identified as critical: Lab LOINC Names, Agent Names, Stages and
Diagnosis. Tommie asked for added input on priorities. She said she
would send out the list and ask for input. It was clarified that the
list included some vocabularies.

Alice Birnbaum asked about the "Tooth Numbering System". Mary Cooper
said that this was added to the list to create a standard for NIDCR. It
is actually already in use in the community. Mary will work with Alice
to bring that forward.

Janice Chilli said that DCP was going to bring forward Body System,
Organ System and Body Sites but have decided to use what they currently
have. Janice said that she could work with DCP and Imaging to bring
these forward.

Dianne asked what was included with the NAACCR standard. Tommie
responded that it includes items like demography, treatment, types of
tumors and diagnosis used as message sets for exchanging information.

**2. New Standard -- Person Prefix Name**

Person Prefix Name is part of a package of data standards. Mary said
that the package describing multiple standards is too large to review at
any single meeting, so the team will present them one at a time.

Person Prefix Name captures the social titles associated with a person's
name, focused on both spoken terms (Dr. Smith) and on written terms such
as those used in an address. There is no list of abbreviations and most
capture as a free text field. The group left out honorifics. Family
relationships will be proposed as a separate CDE. The purpose of the
standard is to capture formal title used as an abbreviated prefix to a
person's name. Mary reviewed current caDSR usage. There is a CDE called
Courtesy Title (from SPORES) that is a candidate for reuse and one
called Person Name Prefix Code (from DCP).

Mary proposed the following:

DEC: Person Prefix Name

Dianne said that the DEC s should not be reused but that a new DEC be
created. There was a discussion of how to create this. It was suggested
to use: Object: Person, Property: Name, and Qualifier: Prefix but Claire
Wolfe suggested having Name be a Qualifier, and Prefix be the Property.
There was agreement. There was a discussion of using Title instead of
Name as the property.

*The group agreed: create a new DEC - Person Name Prefix.*

Mary proposed using an existing value domain from one of the current
CDEs, modified to meet the use cases.

Mary said that there are no current use-cases for Military Titles and
asked if we should add them. Tommie noted that the titles were not
equivalent across services. Brian Campbell asked why they wouldn't be
included. He said that CTEP does have staff with military titles. Tommie
said that the Public Health Service titles might also be needed. It was
agreed that there might be a use case for them. Mary agreed to pull in a
list of Military Titles to present to the group at the next meeting.
Mary said this might become an addition to the Person Name standard,
rather than as a separate CDE standard. She proposed reusing the DCP
list, limited it to abbreviations for titles, but excluding family
relationships. Mary will work with DCP's curator to add the values
needed.

Brian said that some of the prefix terms in the domain were roles. Mary
said that the Name Prefix was very descriptive. There will also be a
Name Suffix.

Mary will bring the list of Military Titles and drafted CDEs to the next
meeting.

Mary announced that this standard should be voted on at the next
meeting. At that meeting, Academic Degrees will also be presented. Mary
will work with the VCDE on how to present these standards to the VCDE.

**3. Value Domain Naming Exercise**

Tommie presented the summary of comments received and prepared by
Dianne.

1\. Creation of long and short names. The group agreed that
representation term is last and qualifiers precede that.

2.  Why does it matter? There was a mix of responses, including a
    notation that in some cases, short names are not used. ISO 11179
    doesn't specify naming of value domain.

3.  Considerations in naming -- generic vs. specific. The response was
    that the naming should match the content of the VD.

4.  Many representation terms -- what are self contained (number or
    date)? Comments reflected lack of guidance on terms like amount,
    count, number. There is no good guidance in training on how to
    select good terms.

5.  Does VD have to be from the same conceptual domain as the paired
    DEC? Generally, yes, although if the VD is very generic, it may not
    be possible. Derived elements present special considerations.

    Dianne summarized that curators wanted to see the 38 acceptable
    representation terms used consistently, whether in manual curation
    or in models; representation term comes last; there are a number or
    representation terms that are fully defined and don't need
    qualifiers, and that more guidance is needed to select good terms.

    Dianne said that these findings should result in a set of
    prioritized action items. She said it represented a way to
    standardize curation practices. Brenda Maeske said that this should
    be in the best practices document. Dianne said that minimum
    requirements in naming value domains would be useful. There might be
    2 levels of curation standards -- one that is a minimum level and
    one that is a "best practice." Mary said that with metadata coming
    in from various sources, that there might be some cases where there
    are slightly different practices. Tommie said that the models should
    be creating CDEs with representation terms, and should be given
    guidance to use one from the 38 representation terms.

    Claire said that only one representation term can be entered in a
    model and they are interested in tags that are optional. Brian said
    that each CDE should have only one representation term. He said that
    when a term (text) is only used as a representation term, then they
    shouldn't be used elsewhere and that one of the difficulties of
    using representation terms in other administered components is that
    the meaning of the representation term is lost. Dianne disagreed and
    said those terms may mean something else in context and did not want
    curators to stretch to find alternate synonyms. For example, Name
    can be an attribute, not just a representation. Denise Warzel said
    that it wouldn't be possible to reserve the terms for only a single
    use. But, she did recognize that Brian's suggestion would avoid some
    confusion if the terms are redundant, however if the term has a
    label, the definition can give the specific semantics.

    Denise suggested creating CUIs in EVS for the terms in their
    different contexts (as an object, as a property, as a representation
    term). Dianne said that EVS would not so this. Denise thought that
    this was worth revisiting. Janice questioned if we could resolve
    this with EVS, would the tooling support the choice of only one
    representation term for that use. Denise responded that this would
    be a future request and applied across tools.

    There was a discussion of where to store the specificity -- in the
    DEC or in the VD. The qualifier is used to define the representation
    term (end date, begin date). Denise said the intent was to start at
    the conceptual domain level. The specificity should be in the
    representation term qualifiers. Brian said that it should have
    semantic link to the representation term with the greater
    specificity in the DEC. Brian said that the value domain long name
    could be used for additional identification information.

    DEC -- Person Name Prefix

    VD -- Person Name Prefix Code (representation is code)

    Brian said that you need enough specifics associated with a value
    domain to enable discovery. Denise said that the model might need to
    be modified to capture them without muddying the representation
    term. Qualifiers only qualify the representation term; not adding
    conceptual notions to it. Dianne said that the conceptual domains
    are being assigned differently in models and in manual curation.
    Tommie said that a review of the conceptual domains was needed in
    order to harmonize the list. Denise said that the hierarchy of
    concepts on the EVS tree should be used.

    There was no decision made to the representation term discussion so
    this will be added to the agenda for the next meeting.

    **4. Value Domain Types -- Best Practices**

    Due to time constraints this will be discussed at the next meeting.

    **Decisions:**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
1.  Person Prefix Standard -- the group agreed that the DEC should be
    Person Name Prefix. It was also agreed that Military titles should
    be included in the value domain.

**Meeting Schedule January 2007:**

**[2007]{.underline}**

07/16 - Content

07/23 - Software

07/30 - Content

08/06 - Software

08/13 - Content

08/20 - Software

08/27 - Content

09/03 - [Holiday]{.underline}

09/10 - Content/Software

09/17 - Software

09/24 - Content

10/01 - Software

10/08 - [Holiday]{.underline}

10/15 - Software/Content

10/22 - Content

10/29 - Software

11/05 - Content

11/12 - Software

11/19 - Content

11/26 - Software

12/03 - Content

12/10 - Software

12/17 - Content

12/24 - [No meeting.]{.underline}

12/31 - [No meeting]{.underline}.

**[Follow Up/Action Items]{.underline}:**

+-------+------------------------+------------+-----------+-----------+
| **A   | **Task**               | **Assigned | **Date    | **Date    |
| ction |                        | To**       | Due**     | Co        |
| I     |                        |            |           | mpleted** |
| tem** |                        |            |           |           |
+=======+========================+============+===========+===========+
| 1     | Send out Agenda to be  | Tommie     | biweekly  | Ongoing   |
|       | reviewed for next      | Curtis     |           |           |
|       | meeting                |            |           |           |
+-------+------------------------+------------+-----------+-----------+
| 2     | Send out a request to  | Tommie     | TBD       | New       |
|       | the workspaces for CDE | Curtis     |           |           |
|       | standards.             |            |           |           |
|       |                        | Brian      |           |           |
|       |                        | Davis      |           |           |
+-------+------------------------+------------+-----------+-----------+
| 3     | Develop risk           | Dianne     | TBD       | Ongoing   |
|       | mitigation plan for    | Reeves     |           |           |
|       | usage of caDSR         |            |           |           |
|       | metadata that in not   | Tommie     |           |           |
|       | fully compliant with   | Curtis     |           |           |
|       | caDSR business rules   |            |           |           |
|       | and best practices.    |            |           |           |
+-------+------------------------+------------+-----------+-----------+
| 4     | Research the impacts   | All        | 4/23/07   | New       |
|       | of versioning class    |            |           |           |
|       | schemes for data       |            |           |           |
|       | standards              |            |           |           |
+-------+------------------------+------------+-----------+-----------+
| 5     | Review list of value   | All        | TBD       | New       |
|       | domain types and add   |            |           |           |
|       | examples and text for  |            |           |           |
|       | each.                  |            |           |           |
+-------+------------------------+------------+-----------+-----------+
| 6     | Send training workbook | Jenny      | 5/29/07   | New       |
|       | examples of value      | Brush      |           |           |
|       | domains to Tommie      |            |           |           |
|       | Curtis to be included  |            |           |           |
|       | in best practice       |            |           |           |
|       | document.              |            |           |           |
+-------+------------------------+------------+-----------+-----------+
| 7     | Add Military Titles to | Mary       | 7/16/07   | New       |
|       | Person Name Prefix     | Cooper     |           |           |
|       | value domain.          |            |           |           |
+-------+------------------------+------------+-----------+-----------+