Stream: Da+Vinci+PDex+Plan-Net
Topic: Validating http://nucc.org/provider-taxonomy Codes
Charlie Filkins (Nov 18 2020 at 13:10):
In trying to understand what we should use for a system in our OrganizationAffiliation specialty representations, I tried validating the OrganizationAffiliation-PharmChainAffil3.json example file in the 0.1.8 package. I receive the following information
FHIR Validation tool Version 5.1.21 (Git# 5b62d35f715f). Built 2020-11-11T02:04:31.124Z (7 days old)
Java: 13.0.2 from /Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/jdk-13.0.2.jdk/Contents/Home on x86_64 (64bit). 4096MB available
Paths: Current = /Users/me/Documents/InterOp/Examples/DaVinci/Specialities, Package Cache = /Users/me/.fhir/packages
Params: -version 4.0 -ig hl7.fhir.us.davinci-pdex-plan-net#current OrganizationAffiliation-PharmChainAffil3.json
Loading
Load FHIR v4.0 from hl7.fhir.r4.core#4.0.1 - 4575 resources (00:05.0225)
Terminology server http://tx.fhir.org - Version 1.0.362 (00:01.0170)
Load hl7.fhir.us.core#3.1.0 - 143 resources (00:00.0779)
Load hl7.fhir.us.davinci-pdex-plan-net#current - 109 resources (00:00.0009)
Get set... go (00:00.0653)
Validating
Validate OrganizationAffiliation-PharmChainAffil3.json 00:01.0604
Done. Times: Loading: 00:08.0156, validation: 00:01.0604
FAILURE: 1 errors, 0 warnings, 1 notes
Error @ OrganizationAffiliation.specialty[0] (line 36, col10) : None of the codes provided are in the value set http://hl7.org/fhir/us/davinci-pdex-plan-net/ValueSet/SpecialtiesVS (http://hl7.org/fhir/us/davinci-pdex-plan-net/ValueSet/SpecialtiesVS), and a code from this value set is required) (codes = http://nucc.org/provider-taxonomy#3336M0002X)
Information @ OrganizationAffiliation.specialty[0] (line 36, col10) : None of the codes provided are in the value set http://hl7.org/fhir/ValueSet/c80-practice-codes (http://hl7.org/fhir/ValueSet/c80-practice-codes), and a code is recommended to come from this value set) (codes = http://nucc.org/provider-taxonomy#3336M0002X)
I can find the code 3336M0002x in the ValueSet-NonIndividualSpecialtiesVS.json file, which I believe is properly included into ValueSet-SpecialtiesVS.json. I've looked as best I can and can't determine if this is a problem with the validator or with the ValueSet specifications.
Any help on this is appreciated ... Charlie
Saul Kravitz (Nov 18 2020 at 16:30):
my vote is the validator.
See -- https://chat.fhir.org/#narrow/stream/179252-IG-creation/topic/Carin-BB.3A.20.20Terminology.20Errors
I think somewhere there is a problem validating ValueSets that are built from ValueSets (instead of codesystems, or individual codes).
Charlie Filkins (Nov 18 2020 at 22:21):
@Saul Kravitz Given your hint, I did a little testing and can confirm your suspicions, though only for one instance ... ProvideRole.specialty uses a ValueSet without includes and that works just fine. Should I just create an issue in GitHub?
Saul Kravitz (Nov 18 2020 at 22:27):
In github, or in zulip #igcreation?
Charlie Filkins (Nov 19 2020 at 17:45):
@Saul Kravitz In the immortal words of Charlie Brown ... ARRRRGGGGHHHHHHHH ... PractitionerRole-HansSoloRole1.json from the DaVinci examples validates with only Information and Warning messages in v5.1.21 of the Validators, but throws errors in 5.1.22. Should I still use the igcreation stream to ask this question, or is there a better place?
Saul Kravitz (Nov 19 2020 at 17:47):
I would start in igcreation. Worst thing that will happen is that you get chided to go to the right place (been there done that).
Charlie Filkins (Nov 19 2020 at 17:48):
Sounds good. Thanks for your help with this.
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
