Manual available for visualization tool? #181
Comments
|
There seems to be a problem with the testing of xml files. JSON files work fine. We will try to fix this. In the mean time you can use: https://fhir-formats.github.io/ or the Visual Studio plugin vscode-fhir-tools to convert your xml file to json. We will notify you if the bug is fixed. |
|
What can we expect as feedback from the visualisation tool? |
|
As feedback from the visualization tool, you get a "readable" rendering of the message, i.e. a message that can be read by people who have no computer science background, such as a clinical biologist. Secondly, you also get a validation against the standard. The compliancy problems are pointed out line by line. |
|
"We will notify you if the bug is fixed." |
|
@KristiaanJaques , we will keep you up to date, but I won't be in 2022 anymore. |
|
Thank you for the suggestion to convert XML files to JSON. |
|
@bdc-ehealth, we also would like to use XML. |
|
As an alternative to the online visualiser/validator, try the one in this repository: https://github.com/ehealthplatformstandards/laboResultVisualization When something goes wrong in the online validator, it can be helpful to get a second opinion. For example, the online validator fails without a proper error message if the Organization resource referenced as the performer of the DiagnosticReport does not have a name. This tool also fails on that, but at least gives a stack trace and an indication of what went wrong. I suppose it can work with XML as well, but I haven't tried. |
|
@sttav , @KristiaanJaques The Visualization Tool now works for XML, except for the validation. This will be fixed soon, we will keep you up to date. Check: https://fhir-testserver.be/index.php/visualization_webapp |
|
@sttav , @KristiaanJaques XML Validation is now available as well in the Visualization tool! |
|
@bdc-ehealth , Dear, we now use the Visualization Tool at https://fhir-testserver.be/index.php/visualization_webapp. |
|
@sttav, could be that this is the cause, although I doubt it... you can send me the file you tested with at support@be-ehealthstandards.atlassian.net, or if the information is not GDPR sensitive, you can just attach it here. I will check it for you. |
|
In bijlage de file.
Bij voorbaat dank
…________________________________
Van: Bart Decuypere (eHealth) ***@***.***>
Verzonden: donderdag 23 maart 2023 16:11
Aan: hl7-be/lab ***@***.***>
CC: Stefaan Tavernier ***@***.***>; Mention ***@***.***>
Onderwerp: Re: [hl7-be/lab] Manual available for visualization tool? (Issue #181)
@sttav<https://github.com/sttav>, could be... you can send me the file at ***@***.******@***.***>, or if the information is not GDPR sensitive, you can just attach it here. I will check it for you.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#181 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACDAJOJVG6Z6NR2SWKWNRO3W5RRYLANCNFSM6AAAAAAS6O6QKA>.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
|
@sttav , the file did not make it to GitHub. Could you add it using the browser in stead of using a mail. Or just email it to support@be-ehealthstandards.atlassian.net if you prefer email. |
|
Hi, this is the XML renamed tot TXT. KR |
|
@bdc-ehealth btw, I received an email bounce when i tried to mail to the support@be-ehealth... , the mail alias was not recognised. |
|
@sttav , sorry I made a typo: 'support@be-ehealth-standards.atlassian.net'. I am looking at your file. |
|
@sttav , here is the result from a very recent version of the validator. There are some order issues, but not only with the id. |
|
@bdc-ehealth FYI yes, we get multiple errors but mainly because the ordering does not follow the XML schema (out of order errors). This is a bit annoying, because there seems to be no prescribed ordering for the json structure. |
|
For your attempts on the test server, I saw that you are not sending the de profile information in the meta.profile section. That is the reason most of your tests fail. |
|
Dear bdc-ehealth, A genuine concern is developling concerning the stability of validation criteria during the homologation procedure. A number of our test files was classified as "passed" in the homologation procedure until yesterday. All of a sudden, none of these files had the status "passed" anymore. The concern is that when we solve this situation and modify the files to pass, later the criteria will change again and we can start all over with development. In this specific case, the meta.profile element is not a required element in the international FHIR standard. Resource.meta https://www.hl7.org/fhir/resource.html#Meta ... profile S 0..* canonical(StructureDefinition) Profiles this resource claims to conform to Did we miss a specific national requirement? Can you point us to the specific national requirement documentation? With kind regards. |
|
As you say, the indication of the profile is not mandatory for the international profile. However, you are developing for the Belgian profile. If you do not indicate that you are creating a file for the Belgian profile, there is no way for the tools to guess that you are doing so. Files that comply with the Belgian standard are a subset of the files that comply with the international standard. As for the changing of the test conditions, the test conditions are made together with clinical biologists, who in case of doubt, judge the clinical risk associated with variations in files that claim to conform with the testcase. If they judge that the risk for clinical mistakes is too high, we make the rules for a particular testcase more strict to avoid the clinical risk (all labs and softwares that already passed the test are re-evaluated so that everybody is evaluated according to the same criteria). This is an advantage, because the informal, intuitive, textual description of a testcase (which is often not very clear at the beginning) is replaced by a objective way of evaluation that is more precise, checkable by a computer and the same for everyone. If you do not agree with the interpretation of the testcase, you can always use the "yellow" button, and we will discuss your input with the clinical biologists. So also your input may cause a change in the testrules, which is a very healthy thing from a collaborative point of view. In your particular case, the files that do not contain the information about the Belgian profile, are not displayed by the visualizer, because they are not recognized as Belgian files. Since the clinical biologists use the visualizer tool as the means for their evaluation, they were not able to evaluate the files you were providing. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Is there an instruction manual for the upload section of the FHIR Visualization tool (https://vizapp.icure.dev/)?
We attempt to submit files to the visualization tool, but keep getting the following error:
"Filename.xml" file upload failed.
Is there a limitation to the extension of the file or other formatting requirements that prevent upload of a file to the test environment?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: