Overview
This endpoint validates existing concept mappings between vocabularies, checking for accuracy, consistency, and adherence to mapping standards. It’s essential for quality assurance in healthcare data integration and cross-vocabulary analysis.Request Body
Array of concept mappings to validate
Show mappings
Show mappings
The source OMOP concept ID
The target OMOP concept ID to validate mapping to
The relationship type of the mapping (e.g., “Maps to”, “Maps to value”)
Expected confidence score for validation (0.0-1.0)
Optional context identifier for tracking related validations
Array of specific validation rules to apply (default: all standard rules)
Options for validation process
Show validation_options
Show validation_options
Validate semantic similarity between concepts
Validate that concepts are in compatible domains
Validate that mappings are temporally consistent
Validate against vocabulary-specific mapping standards
Include suggestions for better mappings when validation fails
Minimum confidence threshold for valid mappings (0.0-1.0)
Query Parameters
Specific vocabulary release version (e.g., “2024.1”)
Include detailed analysis and recommendations in results
Response
Indicates if the request was successful
Response data containing validation results
Show data
Show data
Array of validation results matching the input order
Show validation_results
Show validation_results
The source concept ID that was validated
The target concept ID that was validated
The mapping relationship type that was validated
Context identifier if provided in request
Whether the mapping is considered valid overall
Overall validation score (0.0-1.0)
Mapping confidence score (0.0-1.0)
Results of individual validation checks
Show validation_checks
Show validation_checks
Domain compatibility validation results
Show domain_compatibility
Show domain_compatibility
Temporal validity validation results
Vocabulary standards validation results
Array of validation issues found
Suggested alternative mappings (when validation fails and include_alternative_mappings=true)
Show alternative_mappings
Show alternative_mappings
Alternative target concept ID
Alternative concept name
Alternative concept vocabulary
Confidence score for alternative mapping
Suggested mapping relationship type
Reason why this alternative is suggested
Source concept information for reference
Target concept information for reference
Summary statistics for the validation batch
Show validation_summary
Show validation_summary
Total number of mappings validated
Number of mappings that passed validation
Number of mappings that failed validation
Percentage of valid mappings (0.0-100.0)
Average confidence score across all mappings
Average validation score across all mappings
Most frequently occurring validation issues
Total processing time
Copy
curl -X POST "https://api.omophub.com/v1/mappings/validate" \
-H "Authorization: Bearer YOUR_API_KEY" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{
"mappings": [
{
"source_concept_id": 201826,
"target_concept_id": 443735,
"mapping_type": "Maps to",
"context_id": "diabetes_mapping_validation"
},
{
"source_concept_id": 4182210,
"target_concept_id": 320128,
"mapping_type": "Maps to",
"expected_confidence": 0.9
}
],
"validation_options": {
"check_semantic_similarity": true,
"check_domain_compatibility": true,
"include_alternative_mappings": true,
"confidence_threshold": 0.75
}
}'
Copy
{
"success": true,
"data": {
"validation_results": [
{
"source_concept_id": 201826,
"target_concept_id": 443735,
"mapping_type": "Maps to",
"context_id": "diabetes_mapping_validation",
"is_valid": true,
"validation_score": 0.92,
"confidence_score": 0.89,
"validation_checks": {
"semantic_similarity": {
"passed": true,
"score": 0.94,
"threshold": 0.75,
"explanation": "Both concepts represent Type 2 diabetes with very high semantic overlap"
},
"domain_compatibility": {
"passed": true,
"source_domain": "Condition",
"target_domain": "Condition",
"compatibility_level": "exact",
"explanation": "Both concepts belong to the same domain (Condition)"
},
"temporal_validity": {
"passed": true,
"source_validity_period": {
"start": "2002-01-31",
"end": "2099-12-31"
},
"target_validity_period": {
"start": "2015-10-01",
"end": "2099-12-31"
},
"overlap_period": {
"start": "2015-10-01",
"end": "2099-12-31"
},
"issues": []
},
"vocabulary_standards": {
"passed": true,
"source_vocabulary_standards": ["SNOMED CT", "OMOP CDM"],
"target_vocabulary_standards": ["ICD-10-CM", "OMOP CDM"],
"violations": []
}
},
"issues": [],
"alternative_mappings": [],
"source_concept_details": {
"concept_name": "Type 2 diabetes mellitus",
"vocabulary_id": "SNOMED",
"domain_id": "Condition",
"concept_class_id": "Clinical Finding"
},
"target_concept_details": {
"concept_name": "Type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications",
"vocabulary_id": "ICD10CM",
"domain_id": "Condition",
"concept_class_id": "4-char billing code"
}
},
{
"source_concept_id": 4182210,
"target_concept_id": 320128,
"mapping_type": "Maps to",
"context_id": null,
"is_valid": false,
"validation_score": 0.45,
"confidence_score": 0.52,
"validation_checks": {
"semantic_similarity": {
"passed": false,
"score": 0.62,
"threshold": 0.75,
"explanation": "Concepts have moderate semantic similarity but below threshold"
},
"domain_compatibility": {
"passed": true,
"source_domain": "Condition",
"target_domain": "Condition",
"compatibility_level": "exact",
"explanation": "Both concepts belong to the same domain"
},
"temporal_validity": {
"passed": true,
"source_validity_period": {
"start": "2002-01-31",
"end": "2099-12-31"
},
"target_validity_period": {
"start": "2002-01-31",
"end": "2099-12-31"
},
"overlap_period": {
"start": "2002-01-31",
"end": "2099-12-31"
},
"issues": []
},
"vocabulary_standards": {
"passed": false,
"source_vocabulary_standards": ["SNOMED CT"],
"target_vocabulary_standards": ["SNOMED CT"],
"violations": ["Same vocabulary self-mapping without proper justification"]
}
},
"issues": [
{
"severity": "warning",
"code": "LOW_SEMANTIC_SIMILARITY",
"message": "Semantic similarity score (0.62) is below the confidence threshold (0.75)",
"check_type": "semantic_similarity",
"recommendation": "Consider using a more semantically similar target concept or review the mapping rationale"
},
{
"severity": "error",
"code": "VOCABULARY_STANDARD_VIOLATION",
"message": "Same vocabulary mapping without proper hierarchical relationship",
"check_type": "vocabulary_standards",
"recommendation": "Use 'Is a' or 'Subsumes' relationship for intra-vocabulary mappings"
}
],
"alternative_mappings": [
{
"concept_id": 312327,
"concept_name": "Essential hypertension",
"vocabulary_id": "ICD10CM",
"confidence_score": 0.85,
"mapping_type": "Maps to",
"rationale": "Better cross-vocabulary mapping with higher semantic similarity"
}
]
}
],
"validation_summary": {
"total_mappings": 2,
"valid_mappings": 1,
"invalid_mappings": 1,
"validation_rate": 50.0,
"average_confidence": 0.705,
"average_validation_score": 0.685,
"common_issues": [
{
"code": "LOW_SEMANTIC_SIMILARITY",
"message": "Semantic similarity below threshold",
"frequency": 1
},
{
"code": "VOCABULARY_STANDARD_VIOLATION",
"message": "Vocabulary standard violation",
"frequency": 1
}
],
"processing_time_ms": 1847
}
},
"meta": {
"request_id": "req_validate_mappings_123",
"timestamp": "2024-12-22T10:00:00Z",
"vocab_release": "2025.2"
}
}
Usage Examples
Basic Mapping Validation
Validate simple concept mappings:Copy
{
"mappings": [
{
"source_concept_id": 201826,
"target_concept_id": 443735,
"mapping_type": "Maps to"
}
]
}
Quality Assurance Validation
Comprehensive validation for QA processes:Copy
{
"mappings": [
{
"source_concept_id": 201826,
"target_concept_id": 443735,
"mapping_type": "Maps to",
"expected_confidence": 0.85
}
],
"validation_options": {
"check_semantic_similarity": true,
"check_domain_compatibility": true,
"check_temporal_validity": true,
"check_vocabulary_standards": true,
"include_alternative_mappings": true,
"confidence_threshold": 0.8
}
}
Research Study Validation
Validate mappings for research with context tracking:Copy
{
"mappings": [
{
"source_concept_id": 201826,
"target_concept_id": 443735,
"mapping_type": "Maps to",
"context_id": "diabetes_outcome_study_2024",
"expected_confidence": 0.9
}
],
"validation_options": {
"confidence_threshold": 0.85,
"include_alternative_mappings": true
}
}
Important Notes
- Validation thoroughness - Comprehensive validation checks multiple dimensions of mapping quality
- Performance impact - Detailed validation with alternative mappings increases processing time
- Confidence thresholds - Adjust based on your use case requirements (clinical vs research vs administrative)
- Temporal considerations - Pay attention to concept validity periods for historical data analysis
- Standard compliance - Vocabulary-specific standards are enforced for quality assurance
Related Endpoints
- Batch Map Concepts - Create mappings to validate
- Get Mapping Coverage - Analyze vocabulary mapping coverage
- Get Mapping Quality - Overall mapping quality between vocabularies