Skip to main content
This endpoint provides analysis of mapping quality between a specific vocabulary pair, essential for understanding the reliability of cross-vocabulary translations, identifying high-confidence mappings, and assessing the trustworthiness of mapping relationships for clinical and operational use.

Path Parameters

string
required
The source vocabulary identifier
Example: SNOMED, ICD10CM, RxNorm
string
required
The target vocabulary identifier
Example: ICD10CM, HCPCS, NDC

Query Parameters

string
Specific vocabulary release version to query
Example: 2025.1

Response

object
High-level summary of mapping quality
object
Quality metrics for each vocabulary pair
object
Quality analysis by medical domain
object
Detailed quality metrics and distributions
object
Analysis of quality outliers and anomalies (when include_outliers=true)
Historical quality trends (when include_trends=true)
array
Recommendations for quality improvement (when include_recommendations=true)
object
Analysis metadata and processing information

Usage Examples

SNOMED to ICD10CM Quality

Analyze mapping quality between SNOMED and ICD10CM:
TypeScript

RxNorm to NDC Quality

Analyze drug vocabulary mapping quality:
TypeScript

With Specific Vocabulary Release

Query quality metrics for a specific vocabulary version:
TypeScript

Notes

  • Quality analysis requires substantial computational resources for large datasets
  • Confidence scores are calculated using multiple factors including semantic similarity and validation status
  • Official mappings generally have higher quality than algorithmic or community mappings
  • Quality can vary significantly between vocabulary pairs and domains
  • Disputed mappings may indicate areas needing expert review
  • Quality trends help identify improvement or degradation over time
  • Outlier analysis reveals mappings that may need special attention
  • Quality thresholds help focus on the most reliable mappings for production use