Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Generating OWL for the LOINC/SNOMED Ontology #85

Open
riannella opened this issue Dec 21, 2023 · 3 comments
Open

Generating OWL for the LOINC/SNOMED Ontology #85

riannella opened this issue Dec 21, 2023 · 3 comments
Assignees

Comments

@riannella
Copy link

I downloaded the SNOMED release that includes the LOINC terms (as subclasses of Observable entity) from here:
https://loincsnomed.org

When I convert this release to OWL, it does not include the identification of the original LOINC Term in the output owl file.
The SNOMED browser includes this:
Screenshot 2023-12-21 at 12 03 20

Any ideas how I can get this info (owl:equivalentClass?) via the conversion process?

@riannella
Copy link
Author

These seem to be added:

66141010000114	20231015	1	11010000107	30051010000102	en	900000000000013009	LOINC code ID	900000000000017005
66151010000111	20231015	1	11010000107	30051010000102	en	900000000000013009	LOINC code identifier	900000000000017005
66161010000113	20231015	1	11010000107	30051010000102	en	900000000000003001	LOINC code identifier (core metadata concept)	900000000000017005

@kaicode kaicode self-assigned this Jan 2, 2024
@kaicode
Copy link
Member

kaicode commented Jan 2, 2024

It's true that the RF2 to OWL conversion process does not currently take the LOINC "alternate identifiers" from the RF2 files into the OWL ontology file.
I have raised the question with the relevant group in the comments section here: https://confluence.ihtsdotools.org/display/mag/SNOMED+International+Proposal+to+change+the+RF2+Identifier+File+specification

@kaicode
Copy link
Member

kaicode commented Jan 17, 2024

@riannella
A method to add this information has been suggested in the comment here: https://confluence.ihtsdotools.org/display/mag/SNOMED+International+Proposal+to+change+the+RF2+Identifier+File+specification?focusedCommentId=221184314#comment-221184314
I like the look of option 2. That could be added to the RF2 to OWL conversion tool fairly easily.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants