Stream: IG creation
Topic: Observation with multiple valueCodeableConcept bindings
Corey Spears (Dec 03 2021 at 17:33):
I have an Observation profile where I need to constrain the set of allowed coded values (valueCodeableConcept) based on the code. One set of Observation.codes would have one set of possible values and another set of codes would have a different set of possible values.
I can think of a couple of possible ways to address this:
- Different profiles
- Invariants
Besides the fact that a set of Observation.codes have the same set of types of values, there is not really anything about them that would logically group them, which is why I don't like the profile option (Not to mention a possible undesirable increase in the number of profiles). Any other better ways to handle this than variants that provide rules on a bunch of codes?
Lloyd McKenzie (Dec 03 2021 at 18:04):
We've talked about incorporating ObservationDefinition into validator capabilities. However, that's probably a lot heavier than just using invariants. The invariants would be pretty simple if you have valuesets for both the .code and the .valueCodeableConcept.
Rob Hausam (Dec 06 2021 at 06:09):
I don't know. It seems that ObservationDefinition would likely be more visible and easily accessible and understandable.
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
