update of Revenue Code (AVOF-3244)

[hardhouse]

No description provided.

[mik-ohdsi]

Looks already very good. Question about the replacements: will the existing concepts for codes 0891 and 0892 be retired with an end date just before the start date of the new concepts?
For process reasons, I recommend to include either @Alexdavv or @dimshitc as an additional reviewer.

[hardhouse]

Question about the replacements: will the existing concepts for codes 0891 and 0892 be retired with an end date just before the start date of the new concepts?

no, OMOP can't store duplicates concept_code+vocabulary_id, regardless of the invalid_reason field. so R=U (update)

[mik-ohdsi]

So, @Alexdavv and @dimshitc , this sentence summarizes the complete absence of versioning:
"OMOP can't store duplicates concept_code+vocabulary_id, regardless of the invalid_reason field."
I thought we do have something like a "replacement" algorithm? Only between different vocabulary_id's? Do we really treat concept_code and vocabulary_id as a secondary key?

[cgreich]

Isn't Revenue Codes the exception? Can we discuss this in one of our sessions?

[Alexdavv]

@hardhouse Why do we use the _manual tables? If we have the actual source let's put it into the _stage tables from there. The _manual tables would be used for manual changes only.

[Alexdavv]

Isn't Revenue Codes the exception?

I don't think so:

[hardhouse]

because it's not just an "insert" and not the "source", these are the same manual changes

[Alexdavv]

1. I've found 2 suspicious name changes:

concept_code	vocabulary_id	old_name	new_name
892	Revenue Code	Other Donor Bank - Organ (other than Kidney)	Special Processed Drugs - FDA Approved Gene Therapy
891	Revenue Code	Other Donor Bank - Bone	Special Processed Drugs - FDA Approved Cell Therapy

Is it code reuse or the mistaken name corrected?

Also, some sources say that 23 were redefined with new names. Did we check the semantics didn't change?

2. We destandardize one outdated guy (0175 Nursey - Neonatal ICU).
   But at least 4 are outdated in this source.
   Isn't it a case where we want outdated to be a Standard?

Thoughts?