-
Type:
Change Request
-
Resolution: Persuasive
-
Priority:
Highest
-
US Core (FHIR)
-
3.1.1
-
Cross-Group Projects
-
Clinical Notes Guidance [deprecated]
-
4.2
-
-
Brett Marquard/Gay Dolin: 9-0-3
-
Clarification
-
Non-substantive
Recommend clarifying this sentence to ensure that the duplication requirement for scanned documents in DocumentReference and DiagnosticReport is unambiguous. Currently, the sentence may be interpreted as a potential loophole.
Existing Wording:
If servers properly categorized scanned reports and used the correct resource per report type (e.g. Pathology scan in DiagnosticReport) this wouldn’t be required.
Proposed Wording:
If servers properly categorized scanned reports and used the correct resource per report type (e.g. Pathology scan in DiagnosticReport) this wouldn’t be required, however at the time of this IG's development, this duplication requirement is necessary due to a lack of consistency in proper use of these resources.
(Comment 21 - imported by: Jean Duteau)
- is voted on by
-
BALLOT-14924 Affirmative - Celine Lefebvre : 2021-Jan-FHIR US CORE R1 STU2 STU
- Balloted