FHIR Chat · codesystem and concept status · terminology

Stream: terminology

Topic: codesystem and concept status

Jose Costa Teixeira (Oct 28 2020 at 13:33):

I want to publish a codesystem with some concepts that are in different status - some of them are deprecated, some are active, some are being proposed. I don't know what is the best way.

• CodeSystem.concept.property.code? I don't see any binding on the CodeSystem.property.code
• should we rather extend codesystem-workflowStatus to also support the context CodeSystem.context?
• custom extension?

Lin Zhang (Oct 28 2020 at 13:55):

Model the status as a CodeSystem.concept.property

Lin Zhang (Oct 28 2020 at 13:58):

And it's your call what the datatype is.

Jim Steel (Oct 28 2020 at 23:10):

It's your call, I guess, but definitely read http://hl7.org/fhir/codesystem.html#status

Jose Costa Teixeira (Oct 29 2020 at 06:52):

Thank you. I should have indeed RTFM.
I was not expecting this to be a Key-value pair, but it will work

Jose Costa Teixeira (Oct 29 2020 at 06:53):

property is a code, and it says "In order to assist with consistency between code systems, the following basic property URIs are defined"
Just to confirm, is this the code of the property status?
http://hl7.org/fhir/concept-properties#status

Michael Lawley (Oct 29 2020 at 06:56):

That is the uri of the declared CodeSystem property. Normally the property name would also be status

Jose Costa Teixeira (Oct 29 2020 at 06:58):

Thanls. This is a code, so I cannot declare the system uri, and it is not in the spec too.

Jose Costa Teixeira (Oct 29 2020 at 06:58):

nevermind, i had no coffee yet

Jose Costa Teixeira (Oct 29 2020 at 06:59):

so, reposting the questions (i have 2 now)

Jose Costa Teixeira (Oct 29 2020 at 07:02):

1. should codesystem.property.code have a binding?
2. http://hl7.org/fhir/R4/codesystem-concept-properties is the codes for status, but according to the name, it should be codes for properties, right?

Jose Costa Teixeira (Oct 29 2020 at 07:05):

in this code system, I'd expect to see "status", "parent", "child", "retirementDate", "deprecationDate", "selectable",
and it would be a extensible binding, for me to add things like "source", "owner"

Grahame Grieve (Oct 30 2020 at 00:40):

should codesystem.property.code have a binding

no. but you should consider using a code carefully.

Jose Costa Teixeira (Oct 30 2020 at 07:00):

so how would this look like? I'd want this

    {
      "code": "F40.0",
      "display": "agoraphobia",
      "definition": "Fear of crowds..",
      "property": [
        {
          "code": "status",
          "valueCode": "deprecated"
        },
        {
          "code": "deprecationDate",
          "valueCode": "2020-03"
        }
      ]
    }

Jose Costa Teixeira (Oct 30 2020 at 07:02):

I do not know where/how the property URI comes into play here

Grahame Grieve (Nov 02 2020 at 20:40):

the code is an internal reference in the code system. It doesn't have meaning outside the code system. The URI can be assigned to give it a non-arbitrary meaning

Grahame Grieve (Nov 02 2020 at 20:41):

e.g. this 'status' property matches the formally defined HL7 status property

Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC