Stream: implementers
Topic: coding vs codeableconcept
Ken Stevens (Aug 13 2019 at 18:54):
Why is Encounter.class a Coding but Encounter.type a CodeableConcept?
Grahame Grieve (Aug 14 2019 at 21:31):
@Cooper Thompson
Lloyd McKenzie (Aug 15 2019 at 01:36):
@Brian Postlethwaite
Cooper Thompson (Aug 15 2019 at 16:36):
Encounter.type is a much more open concept. GF#14307 has some info, but many systems will have locally defined value sets for Encounter.type, so CodeableConcept is needed to support that. Encounter.class seems to be more cut and dry, since nearly(?) everyone marks encounters as Inpatient, Outpatient, or a few other classes in the valueset, and a Coding makes it a more dependable key for everyone.
Grahame Grieve (Aug 15 2019 at 19:03):
then why is it not a code?
Lloyd McKenzie (Aug 20 2019 at 17:03):
@Ken Stevens Feel free to submit a change request
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
