About DICOM SR CodingSchemeDesignator

All other questions regarding DCMTK

Moderator: Moderator Team

Post Reply
Message
Author
yueran
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed, 2012-04-25, 08:57

About DICOM SR CodingSchemeDesignator

#1 Post by yueran »

I'm working on DICOM SR recently, and I'm confused about the code Scheme. It's a three value called CodeValue/ CodingSchemeDesignator/ CodeMeaning, I find many SR using "99_OFFIS_DCMTK" in CodingSchemeDesignator value. I think it's a dictionary and where can I get it or It is custom defined by us?

J. Riesmeier
DCMTK Developer
Posts: 2503
Joined: Tue, 2011-05-03, 14:38
Location: Oldenburg, Germany
Contact:

#2 Post by J. Riesmeier »

Coding scheme designators beginning with "99" are private or local coding schemes (see section 8.2 in part 3 of the DICOM standard). We use "99_OFFIS_DCMTK" for sample codes in our sample SR documents. You should not use them for your own SR documents but look into part 16 of the DICOM standard instead ...

yueran
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed, 2012-04-25, 08:57

#3 Post by yueran »

J. Riesmeier wrote:Coding scheme designators beginning with "99" are private or local coding schemes (see section 8.2 in part 3 of the DICOM standard). We use "99_OFFIS_DCMTK" for sample codes in our sample SR documents. You should not use them for your own SR documents but look into part 16 of the DICOM standard instead ...
Thank you!
I read section 8.2, my understand is : if the coding schemes in part 16 is not enough to me,I can define coding schemes ourselves and fill the Coding Scheme Identification Sequence. Is my understand right? but in section 8.2 it said:Systems supporting such private code use must provide a mechanism for the configuration of sets of Coding Scheme Designator, Code Value, and Code Meaning to support interoperation of the private codes with
other systems. I do't know how to do that?

J. Riesmeier
DCMTK Developer
Posts: 2503
Joined: Tue, 2011-05-03, 14:38
Location: Oldenburg, Germany
Contact:

#4 Post by J. Riesmeier »

Your question does not seem to be related to the DCMTK but more to the DICOM standard in general. So, maybe this is not the correct forum to ask.

Did you really check all standardized coding schemes in Table 8-1 of Part 16? And, of course, there are many more around the world. I'm asking this because it is strongly recommended to use standard codes instead of private one (if possible). The issue of private codes is that usually no one else knows their exact semantics. Even if they are documented in the DICOM conformance statement (which is mandatory by the way) the receiver usually has a limited idea of the concept probably derived from the code meaning (which always has to be present in a coded entry).

yueran
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed, 2012-04-25, 08:57

#5 Post by yueran »

Yes, It's really more related to DICOM standard.
OK, I know, Thanks for your reply!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest