Stream: IG creation
Topic: Consent resource intended jurisdiction
Corey Spears (Nov 10 2021 at 19:05):
I have a consent profile where we want to express the intended jurisdiction(s) where it is meant to apply. For example, this would a consent applicable in the US or this other consent would be applicable in California or any jurisdiction with reciprocity for a policy. Where would we put such a concept?
@John Moehrke @k connor
John Moehrke (Nov 10 2021 at 19:07):
Include @David Pyke
John Moehrke (Nov 10 2021 at 19:07):
I would say .policyRule
Grahame Grieve (Nov 10 2021 at 19:12):
what URL?
Corey Spears (Nov 10 2021 at 19:27):
Please note that it may be something translated from a paper form. Which means part or all of it might not be codified.
k connor (Nov 10 2021 at 20:50):
Great question, Corey. Think the agreed upon response should be reflected in the Consent guidance discussion.
Generally, how you express the intended jurisdiction will be based on the use case. You could use one or more Consent elements to capture this information directly/indirectly.
I agree with John that it could be .policyRule if you have/create a code representing the policy specifying a specific consent policy - see http://build.fhir.org/valueset-consent-policy.html for examples such as state (mdhhs-5515 ) or VA specific consent forms, or more general codes for types of consent permissible/required by a law but not a specific consent form e.g., hipaa-restrictions.
You could include the .policy.uri for a .policyRule consent form code. Or simply .policy.uri where the consent policy is kept - e.g., an HIE's APPC XACML consent policy. You could use .policy.authority in combination with .policyRule/.policy.uri to indicate the jurisdiction or organization authority in which either the .policyRule/.policy.uri apply - which seems to be what you are looking for wrt to your specific use case. Does this answer your question?
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
