Usage of Compositoin.Category

Ian McNicoll ian at freshehr.com
Mon Mar 7 12:15:45 EST 2016


Hi Björn,

I finally got around to thinking a bit about this.

It is an interesting problem and I think I can see the need to specify
different data handling requirements but I am not sure that
overloading composition.category is the best approach here.

I suspect this will take a bit of teasing out (and other commit/query
strategy metadata) - might it be better to put this in a cluster
archetype in the Composition extension slot. That would let us play
around with the requirements before pushing something definitive to
the RM?

So far I have 3 axes:

1. Normal commit strategy: persistence vs. event  i.e do we normally
overwrite an existing composition.

2. Source-of-truth i.e. Should this document be regarded as the
primary source of truth for certain kinds of data or otherwise e.g
Does a system look into event compositions or e.g to a Problem list
for 'current problems'

3. Is this a primary document or secondary document? e.g. a Discharge
letter is a secondary document derived from other primary records.

Just starting the discussion :)

Ian


Dr Ian McNicoll
mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859
office +44 (0)1536 414994
skype: ianmcnicoll
email: ian at freshehr.com
twitter: @ianmcnicoll

Co-Chair, openEHR Foundation ian.mcnicoll at openehr.org
Director, freshEHR Clinical Informatics Ltd.
Director, HANDIHealth CIC
Hon. Senior Research Associate, CHIME, UCL


On 17 February 2016 at 21:59, Bjørn Næss <bna at dips.no> wrote:
> We are discussing the use of Composition.Category which is a DV_CODED_TEXT.
>
> There is a terminology:
>
>
>
> <group name="composition category">
>
>                                <concept id="431" rubric="persistent"/>
>
>                                <concept id="433" rubric="event"/>
>
>                 </group>
>
>
>
> Is it required to use only these categories or could an application set any
> DV_CODED_TEXT?
>
>
>
> I think it would be ok to allow any category in this.
>
>
>
> To be concrete:
>
> The use-case is discharge summaries. These are Compositions which only
> (“mostly”) contains links to existing entries. We will be using links but
> since the Composition should be transferred to another health provider it
> must be serialized and validated against an template. Technically this
> Compostions contains a lot of entries which is “link to self”.
>
>
>
> The idea we are considering is to introduce a category for these
> Compositions. The content will not be part of AQL results for normal
> use-cases. But IF you ask explicit for these categories you will be able to
> query for discharge summaries which contains body weight above 120 kg.
>
>  If we only add the references as links it will not be possible to add them
> into forms and neither use a Template to validate the content. This is the
> reason we are “thinking out of the box”.
>
>
>
> Any comments on this?
>
>
>
>
>
> Best regards
> Bjørn Næss
> Product Owner – Arena EHR
> DIPS ASA
>
> Mobil +47 93 43 29 10
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org
> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org




More information about the openEHR-technical mailing list