Stream: implementers
Topic: DAF Profiles
Jake Howell (Jul 24 2017 at 21:03):
I'm quite new to the FHIR spec and I'm trying to implement some DAF (Data Access Framework) Patient extensions. You can see the breakdown here: https://simplifier.net/DAF/daf-patient. My question is, on all of the extensions (for example, race), there is an hl7.org link (like http://hl7.org/fhir/StructureDefinition/us-core-race) that you can refer to, but on all of the ones I've clicked on, it always brings up a 404. Is this normal, or have these been deprecated? Should I be using something else? Thanks in advance!
Dave Carlson (Jul 24 2017 at 21:19):
The published US-Core IG is here: http://hl7.org/fhir/us/core/STU1/index.html
Dave Carlson (Jul 24 2017 at 21:22):
If you are working with DSTU2, use the Argonaut profiles (aligned with US-Core that is defined for STU3): http://www.fhir.org/guides/argonaut/r2/
Bruce Tietjen (Jul 25 2017 at 16:39):
Are the following the correct extensions for US core race and ethnicity for STU3?
http://hl7.org/fhir/us/core/StructureDefinition/us-core-race
http://hl7.org/fhir/us/core/StructureDefinition/us-core-ethnicity
I didn't see a reference for religion -- does it follow the same pattern?
http://hl7.org/fhir/us/core/StructureDefinition/us-core-religion
Also, what about patient-mothersMaidenName?
Dave Carlson (Jul 25 2017 at 17:41):
There are other extensions defined for Patient that are not part of US-Core, see: http://hl7.org/fhir/STU3/patient-profiles.html
Bruce Tietjen (Jul 27 2017 at 15:17):
I would like some help to verify the STU3 XML format of data encoded with one of these extensions because an example I have seen on a public HAPI based Server which claims compliance with STU3 seems to conflict with my own interpretation.
Based on the Downloads:StructureDefinition for XML linked from this page:
http://build.fhir.org/ig/Healthedata1/US-Core/StructureDefinition-us-core-ethnicity.html
(http://build.fhir.org/ig/Healthedata1/US-Core/StructureDefinition-us-core-ethnicity.xml)
It would seem the correct encoding would follow the following pattern:
<extension url="http://hl7.org/fhir/us/core/StructureDefinition/us-core-ethnicity">
<extension url="ombCategory">
<valueCoding>
<system value="http://hl7.org/fhir/v3/Ethnicity"/>
<code value="2186-5"/>
<display value="Non Hispanic or Latino"/>
</valueCoding>
</extension>
</extension>
The example I saw that doesn't seem to follow the above linked format was:
<extension url="http://hl7.org/fhir/us/core/StructureDefinition/us-core-ethnicity">
<valueCodeableConcept>
<coding>
<system value="http://hl7.org/fhir/v3/Ethnicity"/>
<code value="2186-5"/>
<display value="Nonhispanic"/>
</coding>
<text value="ethnicity"/>
</valueCodeableConcept>
</extension>
Can anyone tell me which is correct for STU3 (or are they both wrong)?
Lloyd McKenzie (Jul 27 2017 at 15:42):
The bottom one looks right to me. Where is the top one coming from?
Eric Haas (Jul 27 2017 at 16:34):
The first one is correct. The US Core Race and Ethnicity extensions are complex extensions. (Lloyd in Canadian so he is blissfully ignorant how crazy this US regulatory requirement is :-) ) See the fully fleshed out example in the US Core IG here. The formal extensions definition is here
Lloyd McKenzie (Jul 27 2017 at 19:13):
Has the extension changed? I thought at one point it was a simple CodeableConcept. (Sorry for misleading and happy to live north of the 49th :>)
Eric Haas (Jul 27 2017 at 19:47):
Yes the requirements differ between the main category codes and detailed codes. (A great way to learn how to create complex extensions.)
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
