2015May core #220 - Related type is unneeded complexity

XMLWordPrintableJSON

    • Type: Change Request
    • Resolution: Persuasive with Modification
    • Priority: Medium
    • FHIR Core (FHIR)
    • DSTU1 [deprecated]
    • Orders & Observations
    • Observation
    • 4.20.8
    • Hide

      The composed type has been removed and made into the .component element so this wording has been removed. Tests are defined by observation and Panels can be represented by component, related or using DR. There is already a note explaining grouping as a result of # 7160.

      Eric is open to a better examples of component and related observations - currently a PCR panel.

      Clem will provide some some warning text

      Show
      The composed type has been removed and made into the .component element so this wording has been removed. Tests are defined by observation and Panels can be represented by component, related or using DR. There is already a note explaining grouping as a result of # 7160. Eric is open to a better examples of component and related observations - currently a PCR panel. Clem will provide some some warning text
    • Eric Haas/Clem McDonald:6-0-0
    • Correction
    • Non-substantive
    • DSTU1 [deprecated]

      Existing Wording: Observation.related.type - A relationship type SHOULD be provided. If the relationship type is "COMP"

      (composed), then the observation should not be displayed/interpreted in the

      absence of the related observations.

      Comment:

      Observation related, related type and related target. First don't think that the statement in yellow is true Past test results might be the exception, labs that have the past results don't resend them because they already sent them. Would have to see an example. BMI is reported all of the time without the parts that make it up.

      Think this is mostly an unneeded complexity for which I have not seen any support in routine v2 messages.

      However there does have to be away to define panels and tests sets but assume that is handled by the order (as it was by OBR)

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

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: