Overhaul entities sample to use new schema guidelines

[kmoscoe]

Running at http://bullie.svl.corp.google.com:8080

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request updates the sample entity data and schema definitions to comply with new project-wide schema guidelines. The changes involve restructuring the MCF files and updating the corresponding CSV data entries to ensure alignment with the new naming conventions and data modeling standards.

Highlights

• Schema Migration: Updated entity definitions and statistical variables to align with new schema guidelines, including the migration from 'variables.mcf' to 'schema.mcf'.
• Data Normalization: Renamed variables in the CSV data to match the updated schema definitions for better consistency and readability.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize the Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counterproductive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for GitHub and other Google products, sign up here.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request updates the Alaska hospitals unplanned visits dataset and its schema. It renames the variables in the CSV file to use more descriptive names (e.g., changing EDAC_30_AMI_TOTAL to Count_Patients_HeartAttack) and introduces a new schema.mcf file that models these variables using structured classes and properties. A review comment correctly points out a typo in schema.mcf where measuredProperty is incorrectly defined as dcid:cma/medicalCondition instead of dcid:medicalCondition.

[carojahn]

Given it's a condition of returning, the populationType feels more like patients with a constraintProperty returned (this also makes it easier to compare against all patients

[kmoscoe]

It's a good point, and I tried to come up with a justification in the doc for choosing between a population type / new class and a constraint property, but now I'm not so sure it was valid! I think the problem here is what would the constraint property be? "returned"? It seems kind of weird: a property should reference a class but I don't know what the class would be here. Let's discuss this.

[carojahn]

Left one comment - not strongly opinionated but curious to get your take on why you made it a separate populationType