FHIR Chat · VRDR .NET library version information · Death on FHIR

Stream: Death on FHIR

Topic: VRDR .NET library version information

Pete Krautscheid (Jun 09 2021 at 21:08):

We recently had a question about the .NET versions supported by the VRDR .NET library. Versioning for .NET is somewhat complex. Hopefully the following guidance (which we'll be adding to our documentation) is helpful:

General guidance for .NET versions: To check wether your .NET version supports a release, refer to this .NET matrix https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/net-standard#net-implementation-support First, note whether you are using .NET Core or .NET Framework - see here for distinctions between the .NET implementation options https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/archive/msdn-magazine/2017/september/net-standard-demystifying-net-core-and-net-standard Once you’ve determined your .NET implementation type and version, for example you are using .NET Framework 4.6.1, refer to the matrix to verify whether your .NET implementation supports the targeted .NET Standard version. By looking at the matrix, you can see for instance that .NET Framework 4.6.1 supports .NET Standard 2.0 so the tool would be supported.

Velan (Jun 22 2021 at 20:51):

Hi ALL

In VRDR Death Record object not updating system URL for some attributes....I found few here....can you look into what should we do for that?

Am not able to attached file, how to send file ?

Attributes are

Marital Status
Education Level
Decedent Disposition Level
Tobacco Use
Manner of Death Type

Thanks
Velan

Pete Krautscheid (Jun 22 2021 at 21:18):

Hi Velan, thanks for the question, we'll investigate how the library handles those and see also if there are ways to simplify the handling of code system URLs. You should be able to attach a file using the paper clip icon in the bottom left when you post.

Pete Krautscheid (Jun 29 2021 at 20:52):

In the VRDR .NET library, for fields that require a dictionary to be passed when specifying a code (such as Marital Status) the code, display, and system fields all need to be set. The system field can typically be determined by looking at the value set bound to the field in the IG, but figuring out the correct value for the system string can sometimes be challenging. We do currently have helper methods for some fields that used to be booleans (e.g. ResidenceWithinCityLimitsBoolean) that automatically set the code system; we'll investigate how practical it is to add helper methods for other coded fields in order to remove the burden of having to determine the code system.

Velan (Jun 29 2021 at 21:09):

Yes, if you include helper function for basic/fundamental code values URI mapped automatically would helpful. Once you release that please let us know to consume.

Thanks in Advance
Velan from NYC Dept

Velan (Jun 30 2021 at 20:56):

Hi Pete

In the Canary tool validation shows "urn:oid:###" system value for Education level only, rest of all (Marital Status, Disposition, manner type, tobacco, ...) all requesting "http://terminology.hl7.org/codeSystem/..." url. It's not accepting "urn:oid:" system. Please explain why or suppose to be as?

Thanks
Velan

Velan (Jun 30 2021 at 22:29):

Hi All

Canary tool is validating "Usual Occupation" text value with "Usual Industry" text. I submitted "Programmer" test for "Janet Page" test data. It shows occupation as "Heath Industry". I have attached report for you to review. Please let me know if I miss anything.

canary-report-cancer-1625086077139.html

Thanks
Velan from NYC Dept

Pete Krautscheid (Jul 01 2021 at 16:25):

We've investigated a bit and learned that we should likely be using the URL form of the system rather than the urn:oid: form; we'll update those in a future release

Pete Krautscheid (Jul 01 2021 at 16:26):

We'll investigate the Canary issue

Michael Riley (Jul 01 2021 at 18:13):

@Pete Krautscheid Pete which of the systems we're defined as OIDs? Javalib probably does the same thing as well.

Pete Krautscheid (Jul 01 2021 at 20:41):

Place of Injury is the main one that I noticed. One exercise that we'll want to do, especially as the IG is updated, is go through and make sure all the code systems are correct.

Sarah MacAdam (Jul 01 2021 at 21:40):

@Velan Did this occur in the "Connectathon FHIR VRDR Records" tool? From the report it looks like the occupation was an unexpected "null" and the industry was correct as "Health Insurance". So the Usual Industry looks correct, but Usual Occupation is wrong. Do you have the json that you submitted in the test?

Velan (Jul 02 2021 at 01:32):

Yes I have that. Attached herewith for your review.

Thanks
Velan from NYC Dept YC.DEATH.20210701-21.07_19007315_New.json

Sarah MacAdam (Jul 02 2021 at 13:40):

@Velan the json is missing the valueCodeableConcept for usual occupation. That is why the Occupation field is null. To specify the occupation as "Programmer", you would need this in the VRDR

              "valueCodeableConcept": {
                "coding": [
                  {
                    "system": "urn:oid:2.16.840.1.114222.4.11.7186",
                    "code": "1010",
                    "display": "Computer Programmers"
                  }
                ],
                "text": "Programmer"
              },

Does that resolve the issue you're seeing?

Velan (Jul 15 2021 at 16:02):

Hi FHIR Team

NYC FHIR enhancement in QA, team testing with canary tool IJE record vs FHIR record....they found some of them expecting system values URL whereas FHIR validation is URN:OID#. Please review....

[ERROR] EducationLevel (Decedent's Education Level.)
[ERROR] code
Expected: "ASSOC"
How Canary interpreted your input: "PHC1452"
[ERROR] system
Expected: "http://terminology.hl7.org/CodeSystem/v3-EducationLevel"

How Canary interpreted your input: "urn:oid:2.16.840.1.114222.4.5.274"

[ERROR] display
Expected: "Associate's or technical degree complete"
How Canary interpreted your input: "Associate degree (e.g. AA, SS)"

Thanks
Velan from NYC Dept

Velan (Jul 15 2021 at 16:37):

Hi FHIR Team

Here you have another Decedent Disposition issue when calculating IJE vs FHIR record....
image.png

Thanks
Velan from NYC Dept

Velan (Jul 15 2021 at 16:48):

Hi FHIR Team

Same as my previous way of validation (IJE vs FHIR record).....Ethnicity is null for FHIR whereas IJE as "U"
Canary interpretation as below.....please let me know.

image.png

Thanks
Velan from NYC Dept

Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC