Faites-nous part de vos impressions sur le Serveur terminologique, et aidez-nous à améliorer nos services! Vous avez jusqu’au 3 décembre 2024 pour répondre au sondage. Votre avis nous intéresse! En savoir plus >

Partager :

file FHIR: URI for Health Canada Drug Identification Number

  • Messages : 132
il y a 7 ans 8 mois #2254 par Lloyd Mckenzie
There's no particular benefit to worrying about sharing value set definitions unless they're complex or hard to maintain or there needs to be an authoritative version. Having 7 or 10 different value sets that all say "all DIN codes" won't negatively impact interoperability. Valueset sharing is more important when you're going to have a complex set of filters and enumerations. For example a value set of "all comorbidities for hypertension" might be one worth sharing to ensure consistency (and to allow the benefit of the thought and work that goes into maintaining it to be shared)

Connexion ou Créer un compte pour participer à la conversation.

  • Messages : 27
il y a 7 ans 8 mois #2250 par Andrew Liu
Thanks Lloyd, that is consistent with my understanding.

Coming back to whether or not there is a need to define a ValueSet for DIN (full or a subset of DIN), it depends on the use case. One potential use case is if one is working on a FHIR implementation guide/conformance package for a project, and certain resource data element needs to be using DIN code, the right way of defining the FHIR conformance resources are defining a Manufacture Drug valueset, define the coded data element to ValueSet binding in a FHIR profile (StructuredDefinition), and having the FHIR IG resource reference both the profile and the valueset.

Connexion ou Créer un compte pour participer à la conversation.

  • Messages : 132
il y a 7 ans 8 mois #2249 par Lloyd Mckenzie
Bindings in v3 and FHIR are always to a ValueSet. However, in the instance you don't generally identify the value set, only the code.

Connexion ou Créer un compte pour participer à la conversation.

  • Messages : 27
il y a 7 ans 8 mois #2248 par Andrew Liu
I'm not sure in HL7 V3 or FHIR, you could bind a coded data element/attribute directly to a CodeSystem? Looking at the updated HL7binding syntax wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=Binding_Syntax Regardless if it's "direct" or "indirect binding" (or in V3 the "model binding" vs "domain binding"), the code element/attribute is supposed to be bound to a ValueSet?

I understand in Coding or CodeableConcept in FHIR, you don't necessarily need the valueset, but from Implementation Guide and it's referenced conformance resource package perspective, the way to go still seem to be defining (or referencing existing) valuesets. Someone who is more familiar with HL7 Vocab or CGIT group could probably share more insight on this.

Connexion ou Créer un compte pour participer à la conversation.

  • Messages : 181
il y a 7 ans 8 mois #2233 par Igor Sirkovich
No, we didn't. I'm not sure there is a need to define a value set for the full DIN.

Connexion ou Créer un compte pour participer à la conversation.

  • Messages : 299
il y a 7 ans 8 mois #2232 par Finnie Flores
Thanks Igor. I am aware of this code system. Just wondering if you also created an associated value set URI which is meant to contain the full DIN.

Connexion ou Créer un compte pour participer à la conversation.

Logo d'InfoCentral

La santé numérique à votre service

 

Transformer les soins de santé au Canada grâce aux technologies de l'information sur la santé.