Stream: fmg
Topic: QA - GF#12645 - Approved
Lloyd McKenzie (Mar 08 2017 at 02:00):
GF#12645 wasn't applied correctly as it pertains to CarePlan.activity.reference. Instead of removing ProcessRequest, Michelle accidentally removed ProcedureRequest. She wants to remove ProcessRequest (as noted in the GF#12645) and add back ProcedureRequest (which shouldn’t have been deleted to begin with)?
Lloyd McKenzie (Mar 08 2017 at 02:00):
+1
Josh Mandel (Mar 08 2017 at 02:12):
+1 — but Lloyd, bonus points if you can explain GF#12645 to me in terms I can understand :-)
Lloyd McKenzie (Mar 08 2017 at 02:27):
CarePlan.activity.reference points to a resource that defines the detail of "what should be done" as part of the CarePlan. It points to most of the "request" resources like MedicationRequest, ProcedureRequest, etc. It also points to ProcessRequest which is an FM-invented thing that will likely go away. The CR is to drop ProcessRequest and replace it with Task - which accomplishes everything ProcessRequest did that was inside the scope of CarePlan
Brian Postlethwaite (Mar 08 2017 at 02:59):
+1
Paul Knapp (Mar 08 2017 at 04:33):
+1
David Hay (Mar 08 2017 at 05:52):
+2 - to accomodate the bonus points that Josh mentioned...
Lloyd McKenzie (Mar 08 2017 at 06:00):
:) Approved
Josh Mandel (Mar 08 2017 at 14:05):
Thanks Lloyd! Now I'm trying to figure out what when we'd point to a Task directly, vs to a request that "has a task" associated.
Lloyd McKenzie (Mar 08 2017 at 15:49):
A CarePlan would point to Task when you have a plan to "do something" to another record. E.g. "I plan to stop med x" or "I plan to suspend med y". Not sure what you mean by "a request that 'has a task' associated"
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
