Stream: implementers
Topic: Questionnaire v Observation
Eric Haas (Aug 24 2016 at 23:24):
moved this stream to here:
See this discussion for QuestionnaireResponse v Resource. So in a nutshell I think if you want to share you might need to convert the QR to an Obs in the end. Also using Observation for indirect reporting is certainly allowed - this has been discussed in the past and there are several way to indicate if it is indirect. Provenance may indicate the Observation was created from a QuestionnaireResponse. The code or method may indicate how the information was gathered or the performer may be a related person for example a spouse answering on behalf of a partner. Finally from a data integrity standpoint one might create a category of "home-monitoring" or "self-reported" to try to distinguish the more reliable or less reliable measurements or observations. That part has been discussed as well although I am not aware of how it has been implemented to date.
Fred Sieling (Aug 30 2016 at 15:42):
Very helpful, thank you Eric! I understand that Q/QR is useful for documenting the data collection form and tracking provenance; however, best practice for sharing the data would be to map into resources such as Observation/Encounter/Procedure/etc. That make sense when I think about the mechanical process of mapping physical data models.
It leaves open a practical or policy question: in terms of real-world use, which FHIR- or SMART-compliant systems will allow resources (Observation/Encounter/Procedure/Etc.) to flow into their systems and when? My understanding is at this time, no implementers are working on a generic feature to allow data to flow in. Is that fairly stated?
I'm cross posting to argonaut/SMART Data Flow into EHR?: https://chat.fhir.org/#narrow/near/34393/stream/argonaut/topic/SMART.20data.20flow.20into.20EHR.3F
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
