Jan 2015 Ballot Comment #45

XMLWordPrintableJSON

    • Type: Change Request
    • Resolution: Persuasive
    • Priority: Medium
    • FHIR Core (FHIR)
    • DSTU1 [deprecated]
    • Modeling & Methodology
    • (many)
    • Resources
    • Hide

      We have existing guidance around the use of "isModifier" as well as rules that require complete "coverage" of the semantic space for "code" attributes. ?However, we will re-iterate these to the work groups specifically with respect to status and will call out "entered in error" as something worth consideration. ?However, we feel that "entered in error" is something to be considered domain by domain. ?For example, with Account, entered in error is subsumed under "inactive" for business purposes and calling it out as a distinct code may be inappropriate, while for Alert, the notion of "this was once the case" vs. "this was never the case" could be an important distinction.

      ?

      2015-01-19 MnM Q2 Isaac/Bill 14-0-1

      Show
      We have existing guidance around the use of "isModifier" as well as rules that require complete "coverage" of the semantic space for "code" attributes. ?However, we will re-iterate these to the work groups specifically with respect to status and will call out "entered in error" as something worth consideration. ?However, we feel that "entered in error" is something to be considered domain by domain. ?For example, with Account, entered in error is subsumed under "inactive" for business purposes and calling it out as a distinct code may be inappropriate, while for Alert, the notion of "this was once the case" vs. "this was never the case" could be an important distinction. ? 2015-01-19 MnM Q2 Isaac/Bill 14-0-1
    • Correction
    • Non-substantive
    • DSTU1 [deprecated]

      Existing Wording \\isModifier=No

      Proposed Wording \\isModifier=Yes

      Comments
      Status fields in various resourcesAccount.status [active | inactive]Alert.status [active | inactive | entered in error]Appointment.participant.status [accepted | declined | tentative+]Communication.status [in progress | completed | suspended | rejected | failed]CommunicationRequest.status [completed | suspended | rejected | failed+]DeviceUseRequest.status [in progress | completed | suspended |rejected | aborted+]Encounter.location.status [planned | present | reserved]Goal.status [proposed | in progress | sustaining | cancelled | accepted | rejected+]NamingSystem.status [proposed | active | retired]NutritionOrder.status [requested | active | inactive | held | cancelled]Subscription.status [requested | active | error | off]Supply.status [requested | dispensed | received | failed | cancelled]

      isModifier attribute needs to be reviewed and verified for all status fields in particular and all codeableconcept lists in general.

      Listed resources each have a status element that are NOT marked isModifier=true but the list of values appear to indicate that it is most likely a modifying atribute.

      Likewise, "entered in error" can probably be applicable to most status lists so the lists should be reviewed.

      Grahame's Comments
      Agree. MnM to drive

            Assignee:
            Unassigned
            Reporter:
            jason_mathews
            Watchers:
            2 Start watching this issue

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: