-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
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
Add codification vaccine drug product identifier vs. generic ATC code identifier #20
Comments
@bradhead thanks for this insight
Understood, this is much more like how FHIRs data model looks, IMO this information is ideally a good candidate to actually just reference in the VC (e.g via a URL) rather than embedding it by value. Then verifiers could cache the URL's for all the unique vaccine products to enable offline verification.
Agree, or more generally this spec should define the syntax to communicate that, as it's unlikely there will be a single code system chosen globally.
+1 |
ATC does not appear to describe a disease, but rather stands for a specific system in the body and/or what a drug effects in that system: https://www.who.int/tools/atc-ddd-toolkit/atc-classification Example: So it looks like the WHO's ICD system might be the best classifier for disease name: https://icdcode.info/ I do think ATC is a good idea, but I also think we need to support ICD-9 and up. Both ATC and ICD are WHO standards. EDIT: looks like ATC codes become specific enough to describe disease names. My apologies. It does look like ATC is most useful for describing the vaccine's type and ICD is better for describing the disease itself. Just to compare:
|
The batch or lot number goes with a unique product (by identifier), not a vaccine classification like the ATC Code that describes the archetype or generic name of the vaccine (e.g. "COVID-19" being J07BX03) - often synonymous with the disease(s) being tackled. Rather than conflate generic concept codes with product identifiers, I would suggest creating a section in the VC called 'vaccine' that includes a product name, manufacturer and an identifier { value + code system } and disease. In addition, then use ATC Code or more generically another code system { value, system, name } to describe the disease(s) or generic name of the vaccine. The Lot number is part of the event data, but it must refer to a product not an archetype vaccine.
Example: In Canada, every approved product is assigned a Drug Identification Number. It must be paired with the Lot Number (sic batch Number) to provide a tractable administration of that vaccine/drug. Then you may want to convey the disease or generic name of the vaccine and that could be done with ATC Codes, ICD codes or commonly with SNOMED CT codes. Letting the audience know what code system is used for both the generic/disease(s) and the vaccine product would be useful.
As a principle, it would be my preference to let the verifier figure out the mapping form the source code system to their favourite target code system and relieve a burden from the issuing authority to map their source data to a specific code system in anticipation of a specific verifier's needs.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: