Stream: implementers
Topic: Illicit question about CodeableConcept datatype
nicola (RIO/SS) (Dec 01 2016 at 15:03):
Please, explain me - why do we need CodeableConcept, if we could use coding 0..* instead?
Grahame Grieve (Dec 01 2016 at 18:40):
because the text is critical, and trading between the codings and the text matters.
Grahame Grieve (Dec 01 2016 at 18:41):
you can still have coding 0..* and I think there's one or two place where we do. but all the HL7 coding data types reaching back decades have the code/text dichotomy because it works that way
Brian Postlethwaite (Dec 02 2016 at 06:01):
Just noting that coding 0..* is different to CodeableConcept 0..1
The multiple internal codings in the 1 codableconcept are expected to be different representations of the same concept (e.g. an internal value, and snomed value)
To be the same would need to have CodeableConcept 0..*
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
