Also with Physician it would be very, very helpful to include reportingFacility of each facility associated with each Tumor. This information is available in the database but only one reporting facility gets into the XML transmission. The lack of source facility makes it very difficult to conceive of a follow-back plan to a physician if we don't know what facility that physician is associated with.
But overall, this is a great direction. It is taking the huge "nearly flat" xml list of variables and adding dimensionality by clustering variables. This approach is a great path forward for interoperability.
------------------------------
Cathy Geiger
NHSCR
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 10-20-2023 04:56 PM
From: Valerie Yoder
Subject: Use cases for potential new XML levels
The XML Workgroup has started discussing proposing new levels of data in the NAACCR XML hierarchy. The current levels are NaaccrData, Patient, Tumor.
We want to gather use cases for the suggested new levels to support a proposal.
The use cases could be for central and/or hospital registries, for research files, etc. The use case should have a need to transmit or store data in NAACCR XML format. Like you might store extra data in registry software database tables but never need to transmit it in XML - that data wouldn't be a good candidate for an extra level.
These are the new levels we've discussed:
Address (parent element: Patient)
Treatment (parent element: Tumor)
Physicians (parent element: probably Tumor)
Please comment if you have any suggestions of use cases or other new levels to consider!
------------------------------
Valerie Yoder
Utah Cancer Registry
------------------------------