New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Comments on PIXm/PDQm #73
Comments
104:
Change text to: SHALL convey the patient’s local ID and the EPR-SPID.
Resolve Duplicate Patient/Add Patient: both are allowed sending the messages what happened in the local system. |
78:
need to add the sentence too for ITI-78 and split request reponse message semantics (or within the text)
|
83:
targetSystem: SHALL be Restricted to the Assigning authority of the community and the EPR-SPID |
@msmock PersonalRelationship.code must not be used in the feed, but we are able to query it with FTH and MTH (1.9 Requirements on PDQV3 for Patient Demographics Query). does this make sense? |
|
TODO Oliver: Create a Change Proposal that code [1..1] (M) Role (CE) {CWE:PersonalRelationshipRoleType} is changed to No further refinement (or harmonized with Query where MTH and FTH is used). |
The issue has been split. |
No Patient profile and no mapping with PIXv3/PDQv3?fixed by #115http://fhir.ch/ig/ch-epr-mhealth/iti-104.html
All links to the PIXm profile lead to the latest version, while the label specifies v3.0.0.won't fixTypo: SHALL be conform to the PIXm → be conformed, or conformtracked in #106The EPR-SPID as an identifier MAY be added: In Annex 5 §1.7.1.1, the EPR-SPID SHALL be conveyed.tracked in #111Resolve Duplicate Patient: is it really allowed to clients? It seems an operation for administrators only, because that would change access to the discarded patient.allowed, no change neededAdd Patient: is it really allowed to clients? It was supported in PIXv3, but seems weird nonetheless.allowed, no change neededhttp://fhir.ch/ig/ch-epr-mhealth/iti-78.html
The link URL and label to the IHE PDQm profile are wrong.fixed in 7496ff7The link to FHIR leads to R5.fixed in 9ba6757The message semantics is the same as defined in 2:3.78.4.1.2: In Annex 5 §1.9.1.1: The PatientTelecom Query Parameter MUST NOT be used. Why is it allowed here?tracked in #117If there are more than 5 matches, the result should return zero matches.: An OperationOutcome should be required in that case, with the details provided in the XDS counterpart.tracked in #80http://fhir.ch/ig/ch-epr-mhealth/iti-83.html
The link to FHIR leads to R5.fixed in 9ba6757targetSystem: SHALL be Restricted to the Assigning authority of the community and/or the EPR-SPID.: In Annex 5 §1.8.1.1: The DataSource Parameter SHALL be specified to the assigning authorities of the EPR-SPID and the MPI-PID in the affinity domain. The 'or' is not allowed in PIXv3.tracked in #112http://fhir.ch/ig/ch-epr-mhealth/StructureDefinition-ch-pixm-patient.html
tracked in #119Patient.contact.relationship
is allowed (and required). In Annex 5 §1.7.1.1,PersonalRelationship.code
must not be used.http://fhir.ch/ig/ch-epr-mhealth/StructureDefinition-ch-pixm-provider-organization.html
Typo: The value shall be expressed as and ISO OID → as an ISO OIDtracked in #106The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: