-
Type:
Change Request
-
Resolution: Persuasive
-
Priority:
Medium
-
FHIR Core (FHIR)
-
DSTU2
-
Patient Care
-
STU
-
Condition
-
-
Emma/Amit: 18-0-0
-
Enhancement
-
Non-substantive
-
DSTU2
Throughout the introduction
* Loosen the restrictions that a condition is only in context of a clinician (e.g. "recognized by a clinician" or "clinician assessment")
* Loosen the restrictions that a condition is only a medical state (e.g. "state of health" or "disease/illness")
* Include usage for patient concern statements, such as fears, risks, or barriers (e.g. lack of transportation, travel to Africa, fear of losing a parent).
* Include verbiage that there may not be consensus or agreement across stakeholders (e.g. clinician doesn't agree with patient fear of being overweight; patient doesn't agree with clinician's concern about unhealthy relationships)
Within Boundaries and Relationships *(discussed during May 26, 2016 Patient Care FHIR conference call)
* AllergyIntoelrance is misspelled
* Update the sentence "The condition resource also specifically excludes AllergyIntoelrance as those are handled with their own resource." to "When the diagnosis is related to an allergy or intolerance, the Condition and AllergyIntolerance resources *can *both be used. However, using Condition alone is not sufficient as the allergy or intolerance needs to be represented as an AllergyIntolerance to be actionable for decision support."
* Add boundaries for Health Concern (which is a *list of health concern events) versus Condition (which can be a specific concern statement or event).
* Elaborate on Observation/Condition boundaries, per http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/project/fhir/tracker/?action=TrackerItemEdit&tracker_item_id=8872
- is duplicated by
-
FHIR-10614 How wide is the scope for Condition?
-
- Duplicate
-
- is voted on by
-
BALLOT-2604 Negative - Michelle Miller : 2018-Sep-FHIR R1
- Balloted