Some more NAACCR Variables missing NAACCR Values.

[mgurley]

It is possible that this is cruft that we should curate away but right now they are standard concepts and because they have no values, they can't be ETLed:

concept_id	concept_name	concept_code
35918787	CS Version Input Original	2935
35918741	CS Version Derived	2936
35918293	CS Version Input Current	2937
35918766	Type of Reporting Source	500

[denyskaduk]

Hello! For Variable 'Type of Reporting Source' I found in NAACCR dictionaty values and they will be added to vocabulary:

Variable_code	Variable_name	Value_code	Value_name
500	Type of Reporting Source	1	Hospital inpatient; Managed health plans with comprehensive, unified medical records
500	Type of Reporting Source	2	Radiation Treatment Centers or Medical Oncology Centers (hospital-affiliated or independent)
500	Type of Reporting Source	3	Laboratory only (hospital-affiliated or independent)
500	Type of Reporting Source	4	Physician's office/private medical practitioner (LMD)
500	Type of Reporting Source	5	Nursing/convalescent home/hospice
500	Type of Reporting Source	6	Autopsy only
500	Type of Reporting Source	7	Death certificate only
500	Type of Reporting Source	8	Other hospital outpatient units/surgery centers

As you can see values 1-5 and 8 can be introduced as 'Visit'. We want to give this values domain_id = 'Visit' and do them as standard one, in future it can be mapped to our standard visit concepts. Values 6 and 7 seemes like as 'Type concept', but all data from NAACCR will have 'Tumor Registry' as TYPE_CONCEPT_ID, so we will keep this values as non-standard and with domain 'Meas Value'.

[dimshitc]

concept_id	concept_name	concept_code
35918787	CS Version Input Original	2935
35918741	CS Version Derived	2936
35918293	CS Version Input Current	2937

These should be non-standard Observation.
In this case usual ETL fills source_value fields with exact codes and standard_concept_id sets = 0.
If we delete them from the vocabulary, the same will happen.

concept_id	concept_name	concept_code
35918766	Type of Reporting Source	500

I have doubts that these values reflect Visit, so let's make it simplier.
I suggest to make Variable Standard Observation and its values - standard Meas Values.

@mgurley are you agree?

[mgurley]

@dimshitc I agree that the following should be non-standard Observation.

concept_id	concept_name	concept_code
35918787	CS Version Input Original	2935
35918741	CS Version Derived	2936
35918293	CS Version Input Current	2937

I think the following should be Measurement standard. Remember, most of these NAACCR items are modifying tumor characteristics. And we added 'modifier_of_field_concept_id' and 'modifier_of_event_id' to MEASURMENT to allow for these tumor characteristics to modify their diagnosis parent. If we put it in Observation, we will lose the connection to the diagnosis in CONDITION_OCCURRENCE or EPISODE.

concept_id	concept_name	concept_code
35918766	Type of Reporting Source	500

[dimshitc]

all of them - make non standard Observation