Stream: terminology
Topic: Process: to UTG or not
Alexander Henket (May 25 2021 at 11:13):
FHIR#14963 Seeks to create a new ValueSet/CodeSystem bound to a CodeableConcept containing FHIR terminology, hence no SNOMED or other international system. Does that go through UTG or just in the FHIR space? (cc @Brian Postlethwaite)
Lloyd McKenzie (May 25 2021 at 12:40):
For low-maturity resources, new code systems can (and typically should) temporarily live in FHIR space because "good practice" terminology rules don't apply - you can rename codes, change hierarchies, completely rewrite definitions with impunity and no need to deprecate codes. For FMM3+, unless it's a 'code' element, you're supposed to move to an external terminology (e.g. SNOMED, LOINC, terminology.hl7.org, etc.) unless you can convince the FMG there's a good reason to have the terminology only live in the FHIR space (typically because it would have zero relevance elsewhere).
Alexander Henket (May 25 2021 at 12:43):
Thanks Lloyd. We got Grahame in this PA session. As this is also example binding and FHIR terminology, the verdict is that we don't go through UTG for that.
Brian Postlethwaite (May 27 2021 at 03:52):
@Lloyd McKenzie can you advise what process PA would need to go through to get this specific change applied (who do we pass it to)?
https://jira.hl7.org/browse/FHIR-14341
Lloyd McKenzie (May 27 2021 at 09:27):
You'd need to submit a proposal through the UTG Jira project.
Grahame Grieve (May 27 2021 at 09:39):
I don't know what that proposes to change. I don't know which code system it's talking about, and I don't know whether it's proposing to replace a code or a disaply
Grahame Grieve (May 27 2021 at 09:42):
no, I figured it out a little but it's still unclear. It proposing to change the existing display to what it already is?
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
