Stream: implementers
Topic: Must Support in US Core
James Dinsmore (Jun 30 2020 at 17:09):
For the Must Support elements in US Core we understand that we need the ability to capture the data. Quite a few elements include codified values. Historically we've translated current EHR data into codified values but haven't necessarily captured the code itself.
An example might be that the EHR stores "A" for "active" and our view used to generate the FHIR translates the "A" to "active."
Is this an acceptable practice for the must support elements in US Core or must the code itself be captured?
Also there will be instances where our data is always considered "active" and therefore we don't store anything to indicate it is active but the view sets the status to "active." Is this acceptable?
Yunwei Wang (Jun 30 2020 at 17:18):
Not sure what you mean by "view" since FHIR deal with JSON/XML data. Here is US Core Guidance about MUST SUPPORT https://www.hl7.org/fhir/us/core/general-guidance.html#must-support. For your questions, these two items are most relevant:
- US Core Responders SHALL be capable of populating all data elements as part of the query results as specified by the US Core Server Capability Statement.
*In situations where information on a particular data element is missing and the US Core Responder knows the precise reason for the absence of data, US Core Responders SHALL send the reason for the missing information using values (such as nullFlavors) from the value set where they exist or using the dataAbsentReason extension.
Frank Oemig (Jul 01 2020 at 08:24):
@Ioana Singureanu
Lloyd McKenzie (Jul 01 2020 at 14:47):
If FHIR dictates that a given set of codes be used, those codes must be used on exchange. FHIR could care less what codes you store internally, so long as you're able to translate to and from the codes FHIR requires be used for exchange.
Sandhya (Jul 01 2020 at 23:32):
How do you validate a incoming FHIR bundle is FHIR version R4/STU3? And how do you validate it is US Core profile compliant?
Grahame Grieve (Jul 02 2020 at 00:07):
in what context? here's how to do it from the command line: https://confluence.hl7.org/display/FHIR/Using+the+FHIR+Validator
James Dinsmore (Jul 02 2020 at 14:44):
To validate a FHIR bundle is US Core profile compliant we have been using the Community Edition of Inferno (https://inferno.healthit.gov/community).
There is also a Program Edition that will be used during certification of G10 (https://inferno.healthit.gov/inferno).
Another great tool is the Simplifier.net Validator (https://simplifier.net/validate) but please note that it will not test against any "must support" elements. The Inferno test on the other hand will expect those must support elements to ensure your FHIR server can include them.
Reece Adamson (Jul 02 2020 at 15:10):
Another resource to be aware of for validating just the FHIR Resources is: https://inferno.healthit.gov/validator. We have been building this tool as a simple web-based validator that uses the HL7 Validator under the hood.
It hasn't been broadly advertised yet as we have been working on getting a few key features in, but its certainly ready to use! Right now it lets you select from base FHIR or US Core Profiles and has error highlighting, but we plan to make it more general and have support for all other IGs available in the NPM registry very soon! Source for the app is here (still need to add a link to that to the view itself)
Sandhya (Jul 02 2020 at 16:15):
Grahame Grieve said:
in what context? here's how to do it from the command line: https://confluence.hl7.org/display/FHIR/Using+the+FHIR+Validator
I will look into this. Thanks for the information.
Sandhya (Jul 02 2020 at 16:15):
James Dinsmore said:
To validate a FHIR bundle is US Core profile compliant we have been using the Community Edition of Inferno (https://inferno.healthit.gov/community).
There is also a Program Edition that will be used during certification of G10 (https://inferno.healthit.gov/inferno).
Another great tool is the Simplifier.net Validator (https://simplifier.net/validate) but please note that it will not test against any "must support" elements. The Inferno test on the other hand will expect those must support elements to ensure your FHIR server can include them.
Thanks for the info. Will ask more questions when I go through these tools.
Sandhya (Jul 02 2020 at 16:16):
Reece Adamson said:
Another resource to be aware of for validating just the FHIR Resources is: https://inferno.healthit.gov/validator. We have been building this tool as a simple web-based validator that uses the HL7 Validator under the hood.
It hasn't been broadly advertised yet as we have been working on getting a few key features in, but its certainly ready to use! Right now it lets you select from base FHIR or US Core Profiles and has error highlighting, but we plan to make it more general and have support for all other IGs available in the NPM registry very soon! Source for the app is here (still need to add a link to that to the view itself)
Thank you.
Sandhya (Jul 02 2020 at 18:08):
Grahame Grieve said:
in what context? here's how to do it from the command line: https://confluence.hl7.org/display/FHIR/Using+the+FHIR+Validator
Hello Grahame, to give you context we are designing an API that takes FHIR bundle as input and we are planning to integrate the validation of FHIR version & US Core compliant check as part of the API. So, I am looking for standard validation process how people are approaching.
Grahame Grieve (Jul 02 2020 at 21:19):
the easiest way to do it will be that we are packaging the validator up as a deployable web service, but that's not done yet. You can look at org.hl7.fhir.validation.NativeHostServices. Or you can run HAPI and use the validator in that context, though you get a lot more packaging around it - that might be good or bad depending on what you want
Oliver Egger (Jul 03 2020 at 06:42):
Sandhya said:
So, I am looking for standard validation process how people are approaching.
We based our API on the $validate operation and extended/implemented it, that is also available system wide (on the base of the server), independent of the resource type you put in as a parameter in. We implemented that on to of hapi and are using the java validator directly, see https://github.com/ahdis/matchbox if interested.
Sandhya (Jul 07 2020 at 15:52):
Just curious is there any reference implementation available using .Net? FYI.. We have used .Net FHIR models in our implementation, which also came in handy for resource validations.
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
