...
| Pros: | - lesion location, location laterality and location details are represented as separate TUTESTs - allowing different results
|
|---|
| Cons: | - The need to create lesion type-specific tests (e.g. aneurysm, calcified annuls, etc), causing an expansion of TUTESTs. For each lesion type, you may create:
- xxx location identification
- xxx location laterality identification
- xxx location directionality identification
- xxx location portot identification
- xxx location detail identification
- Reusibility in other domains is limited, seeing as lesion identification should all be mapped to TU.
- Requires good understanding of lesion anatomy and the difference between TSTLOC vs RESLOC in order to map the locations properly and correctly for each corresponding test, step wise.
- Just a lot of rows...
|
|---|
| Vote: |
|
|---|
Approach 3: taking a similar approach as SEND in MI domain modeling where MI test = microscopic examination, and what you find is the result.
I think Diane had proposed this approach before but it didn't go anywhere?
...