documentation:next_cdm:time
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
|
documentation:next_cdm:time [2016/11/01 18:14] hripcsa |
documentation:next_cdm:time [2017/07/06 15:05] (current) clairblacketer |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ===== Add Time Field to various Occurrence and Exposure Tables ===== | ===== Add Time Field to various Occurrence and Exposure Tables ===== | ||
| + | === Proposals are now being stored as github issues === | ||
| + | [[https://github.com/OHDSI/CommonDataModel/issues/60|link to issue in github]] | ||
| While v5 visit_occurrence table supports both date and time of event, other occurrence tables and exposure tables such as drug, condition, and procedure support only the date level. It is desirable to have the option to include specific time data for such occurrences. Our goal is to allow temporal operations finer than day without disrupting OHDSI by requiring major recoding. | While v5 visit_occurrence table supports both date and time of event, other occurrence tables and exposure tables such as drug, condition, and procedure support only the date level. It is desirable to have the option to include specific time data for such occurrences. Our goal is to allow temporal operations finer than day without disrupting OHDSI by requiring major recoding. | ||
| Line 52: | Line 54: | ||
| And the ERA tables, COHORT tables, and PAYER_PLAN_PERIOD table. | And the ERA tables, COHORT tables, and PAYER_PLAN_PERIOD table. | ||
| + | |||
| === DECISION 1 === | === DECISION 1 === | ||
| - | We propose adding a time field or fields to the following tables | + | We have a choice between adding fields of type time, which require significant processing to determine durations (join the date and time, and then operate on that) versus defining a datetime field as timestamp, which allows fast operations but produces redundancy. |
| + | |||
| + | [Suggest datetime = timestamp.] | ||
| + | |||
| + | === DECISION 2 === | ||
| + | |||
| + | We propose adding a datetime field or fields to the following tables | ||
| * Condition_Occurrence | * Condition_Occurrence | ||
| * Procedure_Occurrence | * Procedure_Occurrence | ||
| Line 62: | Line 71: | ||
| * Death | * Death | ||
| - | A time field would be added to each date field. Date fields would not be changed. | + | We propose replacing the current time fields with datetime fields in the following tables |
| + | * Specimen | ||
| + | * Visit_Occurrence | ||
| + | * Measurement | ||
| + | * Note | ||
| + | * Observation | ||
| - | This would support handling data from ICU, Emergency Department, infusions, post-procedure care, etc. where multiple events occur on the same day and sequence matters. This granularity would also support the incorporation of data generated from tracking devices. | + | A datetime field (also known as timestamp field) would be added to each date field. Date fields would not be changed. |
| - | [Suggest moving forward with fields called *_TIME .] | + | This would support handling data from ICU, Emergency Department, infusions, post-procedure care, etc. where multiple events occur on the same day and sequence matters. This granularity would also support the incorporation of data generated from tracking devices. |
| - | + | ||
| - | === DECISION 2 === | + | |
| - | We have a choice between adding fields of type time, which require significant processing to determine durations (join the date and time, and then operate on that) versus defining the time field as timestamp, which allows fast operations but produces redundancy. | + | In addition, current *_TIME fields would be removed. At this point, all current software will continue working with the *_DATE fields, and over time we will develop extensions to the software to accommodate DATETIME in different database management systems. |
| - | [Suggest timestamp.] | + | [Suggest moving forward with fields called *_DATETIME, removing the *_TIME fields. The *_DATE fields will remain required.] |
| === DECISION 3 === | === DECISION 3 === | ||
| - | Are the time fields required. Making them required allows developers to begin to use them with a potential migration from date+time or date+timestamp to timesteamp in the future, but it forces CDM builders to enter unknown times or timestamps. If required, the default time will be the first instant in the allowable period. E.g., 1990-12-01-00:00:00.000000 is the correct entry for December, 1990. | + | Are the datetime fields required. Making them required allows developers to begin to use them with a potential migration from date+time or date+timestamp to timesteamp in the future, but it forces CDM builders to enter unknown times or timestamps. If required, the default time will be the first instant in the allowable period. E.g., 1990-12-01-00:00:00.000000 is the correct entry for December, 1990. |
| [Suggest optional for now.] | [Suggest optional for now.] | ||
| Line 82: | Line 94: | ||
| === DECISION 4 === | === DECISION 4 === | ||
| - | Should a timestamp field be added to BIRTH (or alternatively should PERSON.time_of_birth be changed to timestamp). This will allow more rapid calculation of age but will be redundant with the current information. | + | Should a date time (timestamp) field be added to BIRTH (or alternatively should PERSON.time_of_birth be changed to timestamp). This will allow more rapid calculation of age but will be redundant with the current information. |
| - | [Suggest defer decision.] | + | [Suggest add BIRTH_DATETIME. Remove TIME_OF_BIRTH.] |
| === DECISION 5 === | === DECISION 5 === | ||
documentation/next_cdm/time.1478024080.txt.gz · Last modified: 2016/11/01 18:14 by hripcsa
Page Tools
