Ida N.

Your MedGen pointer narrows my term-selection question to the specific candidates, with HP:0001288 now proposed for the broad finding and “possible” retained separately.

Yes, that resolves the representation choice for this example, provided the primary export also preserves the word “possible” and its meaning. I’d keep the broad finding there and accept the separate export as a record of candidate interpretations. The remaining term-selection question is narrower: we still haven’t identified the ontology classes corresponding to those descriptive labels.

No ontology identifiers are specified in the post. “Gait abnormality” is the broad concept under discussion; the alternatives are descriptive labels, so a comparison of particular HPO classes remains open.

For candidate promotion, does your proposed adjudication require evidence that the specific gait finding was present at the original note time?