FHIR Chat · Resource map · implementers

Stream: implementers

Topic: Resource map

---

Swathy Parameswaran (Feb 07 2019 at 06:39):

Hi,
I am a junior developer in fhir and I have a doubt regarding Resource GET operation.
In my system I'am using an artificially generated string (for Immunization - IMM25) as Resource.id, That uniquely identifies a resource (primary key value - 25). Recently I have got a suggestion to add resource type also in id field that is,
If the Resource type is Immunization and id is IMM25, then I have to use Immunization/IMM25 as Resource.id.
Is the above approach is correct ?

Lloyd McKenzie (Feb 07 2019 at 06:59):

You can't have a "/" character inside an id. The id is only expected to be unique within a resource type, so pre-pending the resource type to a generated id is unnecessary. When you do a GET to read the resource, the URL will be [base]/Immunization/[id].

Medi Harsini (Sep 28 2020 at 00:03):

Is there an equivalent of ConceptMap for resource identifiers where someone could define an identifier mapping and $translate operation to replace/transform and translate a resource identifier to another identifier

Lloyd McKenzie (Sep 28 2020 at 02:33):

There's $preferred-id

Lloyd McKenzie (Sep 28 2020 at 02:33):

(On NamingSystem)

Medi Harsini (Oct 18 2020 at 18:39):

Lloyd McKenzie said:

There's $preferred-id
`

Thanks but couldn’t figure out how you could have a translate operation which helps the identifier translation from type to another.

Lloyd McKenzie (Oct 18 2020 at 21:01):

Can you give an example of what you're wanting to do?

Medi Harsini (Oct 19 2020 at 10:33):

Yes, I want to have an operation for example on organization which translates identifiers from one system to another, all in which defined under organization.identifier and organization.id

Medi Harsini (Oct 19 2020 at 10:34):

I can send you a practical example if it is not
Self explanatory. Please advise

Mareike Przysucha (Oct 19 2020 at 11:09):

So you mean a ConceptMap between two NamingSystems?

Medi Harsini (Oct 19 2020 at 11:21):

Mareike Przysucha said:

So you mean a ConceptMap between two NamingSystems?

Conceptmap between two resources

Medi Harsini (Oct 19 2020 at 11:32):

Let me explain, I’ve got Organization identifiers different in three of my downstream application. When I’m sending messages from one to another, I want my middleware to translate the incoming message to the format accepted by a destination system. Within that transformation I need to translate my codesystema which I use $translate define on conceptmap. However I also need to translate resources.identifiers. Take
An example of an appointment which needs to replace the organization identifier to be accepted by the destination system. One way is to use GET the organisation resource and find the relevant identifier and use that information for the translation but a better way is to design an operation which can do the translation between id and identifier or between the identifiers which can be generally used and implement for any FHIR resources, similar to conceptmap translate for code system

Mareike Przysucha (Oct 19 2020 at 11:39):

That's what I understood. Now to explain my comment: Each identifier has a system, which is described as the namespace for the identifier. It could be a NamingSystem-resource. That's why I wrote "ConceptMap between two NamingSystems". But the "translation" would take place in the single resource, just like a normal $translate for CodeSystems.

Medi Harsini (Oct 19 2020 at 11:59):

Mareike Przysucha said:

That's what I understood. Now to explain my comment: Each identifier has a system, which is described as the namespace for the identifier. It could be a NamingSystem-resource. That's why I wrote "ConceptMap between two NamingSystems". But the "translation" would take place in the single resource, just like a normal $translate for CodeSystems.

Indeed, you’re correct...

Medi Harsini (Oct 19 2020 at 12:45):

That still doesn’t answer the question I’m afraid :)

Mareike Przysucha (Oct 19 2020 at 12:46):

But I think it makes things clearer for the experts.

Lloyd McKenzie (Oct 19 2020 at 15:00):

You could use NamingSystem to capture the data, though you'd need an extension to indicate which identifier is used for which organization. There's no standard operation to do the translation - you'd have to create a custom one, though you could propose HL7 defining a standard one.

Medi Harsini (Oct 19 2020 at 19:26):

Lloyd McKenzie said:

You could use NamingSystem to capture the data, though you'd need an extension to indicate which identifier is used for which organization. There's no standard operation to do the translation - you'd have to create a custom one, though you could propose HL7 defining a standard one.

Thanks, will do. On a different but Slightly related subject, I’ve got a lot of hospitals and their technology providers as a software instance on one side and the same on the other side. So I want to define each softwareInstance+Hospital combo as an entity for examples software123. I then plan to use this code within namespace/system for identifier to indicate that particular resource identifier on software123 is value123. Now the question is which resource I can use to define all of these software instances? The directory of these...

Lloyd McKenzie (Oct 19 2020 at 20:57):

Software is generally represented using Device

Medi Harsini (Oct 19 2020 at 21:19):

Lloyd McKenzie said:

Software is generally represented using Device

Thanks. So in my use case the device would be the softwareInstance and the owner the technology provider but the place where it’s used it’s referenced to location but in my case is a hospital organization

Medi Harsini (Oct 19 2020 at 21:20):

Any other suggestions please ?

Lloyd McKenzie (Oct 19 2020 at 23:38):

Device.owner is not the technology provider, it's the organization that's responsible for the activities that the device takes - which would normally be the hospital organization. The technology provider would be the manufacturer - which is currently just a string, but you could have an extension to point to an organizaiton if you need to

Matt Rouhana (Oct 22 2020 at 13:39):

Lloyd McKenzie said:

The technology provider would be the manufacturer - which is currently just a string, but you could have an extension to point to an organizaiton if you need to

Could you also implement this by creating a DeviceDefinition resource that the Device references? DeviceDefinition.manufacturerReference is a reference to an Organization.

Lloyd McKenzie (Oct 22 2020 at 20:52):

You could, though you can't expect systems to infer that the Device.manufacturer is the Device.definition.manufacturerReference.

Medi Harsini (Nov 02 2020 at 01:41):

Thanks both on the comments. Ive started using DeviceDefinition but unfortunately it failed my model. A devide may be owned by multiple organization and hence why the cardinality doesnt match the criteria. Any suggestions apart from going down the route of extention?

Lloyd McKenzie (Nov 02 2020 at 06:34):

Can you explain your scenario a bit more? How can one device be simultaneously owned by multiple organizations?

---

Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC