Stream: implementers
Topic: Patient Records
Jeremy Walton (Jun 21 2016 at 21:31):
Question: it seems like half of the spec specifies patient as a reference in a field on the object called "patient" and the other half specifies it in a field called "subject". Would it be more beneficial to just name all instances as "subject" and just reference restrict it to Patient (with the possibility of expand ability later)? Maybe have it generic in all Resources as I would say 90% of all Resources pertain to a subject. (i.e. Condition/Encounter as patient, CarePlan/Observation as subject)
David Hay (Jun 21 2016 at 21:40):
The idea was that is the reference was only to a Patient resource, then the element name was 'patient' - if to others, then it would be 'subject'..
Jeremy Walton (Jun 21 2016 at 21:47):
@David Hay Understandable, but doesn't it make it harder to expand later on (deprecate field "patient" and create new field "subject"), rather than just say, this also accepts a new reference resource? I mean, I always read "subject" as who the resource pertains to.
Grahame Grieve (Jun 21 2016 at 23:44):
we don't very often make that change later. at least, we haven't so far, and this hasn't proven to be a problem so far
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
