Stream: implementers
Topic: Profiling and ValueSets
Sufyan Patel (Dec 15 2017 at 10:23):
Hi, I just need extra confirmation regarding profiling mandatory items that are bound to valueSets.
E.g. ReferralRequest.status is a mandatory element linked to RequestStatus(http://hl7.org/fhir/valueset-request-status.html)
Can I profile this element to a different ValueSet?
The link http://hl7.org/fhir/profiling.html#tx states
"Profiles can bind to these value sets instead of the ones defined in the base specification..."
Michel Rutten (Dec 15 2017 at 10:35):
http://hl7.org/fhir/terminologies.html#code
"When an element is bound to a required value set, derived profiles may state rules on which codes can be used, but cannot select new or additional codes for these elements."
Michel Rutten (Dec 15 2017 at 10:36):
A derived profile could further limit the set of valid codes, but cannot introduce new codes.
Sufyan Patel (Dec 15 2017 at 11:06):
Thank You
Eneimi Allwell-Brown (Dec 15 2017 at 13:12):
Hi @all
I wonder why I can't create Observation.component.valueBoolean but it is possible to have Observation.valueBoolean.
I know in the spec it says most observations result values are never truly Boolean but then why the inconsistency? There are couple of valid scenarios for a True/False response, like what I'm trying to implement with multiple components; and then leave handling of unknowns or no responses etc. to the implementer. It just seems a pain to have to define a CodeableConcept for that purpose when a Boolean datatype exists.
Eric Haas (Dec 15 2017 at 14:11):
Was left out of stu3 in error.
Eneimi Allwell-Brown (Dec 15 2017 at 14:36):
Was left out of stu3 in error.
I see, hope it finds its way back in! Thanks.
Lloyd McKenzie (Dec 15 2017 at 16:28):
@Eneimi Allwell-Brown Please don't use @ all as it results in an email sent to every single user of chat.fhir.org. That sort of thing is reserved for critical notifications.
Eneimi Allwell-Brown (Dec 15 2017 at 16:28):
@Eneimi Allwell-Brown Please don't use
@ allas it results in an email sent to every single user of chat.fhir.org. That sort of thing is reserved for critical notifications.
Aha, that's noted!
Eric Haas (Dec 16 2017 at 01:32):
it is there for R4
Jens Villadsen (Dec 20 2017 at 07:56):
Btw - I tried to explain how the structure of valuesets works to some colleagues regarding intensional/extensional, (@Lloyd McKenzie, @Grahame Grieve ) . It could be related to my communication skills, but I ended up searching the net for a better explanation and found http://blog.healthlanguage.com/the-difference-between-intensional-and-extensional-value-sets. From my point of view, I think there is a pretty sound explanation found there regarding the terms intensional and extensional that might be suitable/adding value for the description of valuesets in the FHIR spec.
Lloyd McKenzie (Dec 20 2017 at 07:57):
Feel free to submit a change request proposing the specific language you'd like to see :)
Jens Villadsen (Dec 20 2017 at 08:00):
@Lloyd McKenzie - when do you sleep? :rolling_on_the_floor_laughing:
Jens Villadsen (Dec 20 2017 at 08:00):
@Lloyd McKenzie - when do you sleep? :rolling_on_the_floor_laughing:
correction: do you sleep?
David Hay (Dec 20 2017 at 08:01):
personally, I think both Grahame and Lloyd are robots...
Lloyd McKenzie (Dec 20 2017 at 08:01):
Consultancy makes for strange hours from time-to-time :)
Jens Villadsen (Dec 20 2017 at 08:03):
I'll take that as a 'I don't/no' ...
Jens Villadsen (Dec 20 2017 at 08:22):
done - tracker item: 14351
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
