Medizininformatik Initiative - Modul Pathologie-Befund - ImplementationGuide

The version specific identifier, as it appears in the version portion of the URL. This value changes when the resource is created, updated, or deleted.

The server assigns this value, and ignores what the client specifies, except in the case that the server is imposing version integrity on updates/deletes.

When the resource last changed - e.g. when the version changed.

This value is always populated except when the resource is first being created. The server / resource manager sets this value; what a client provides is irrelevant. This is equivalent to the HTTP Last-Modified and SHOULD have the same value on a read interaction.

A uri that identifies the source system of the resource. This provides a minimal amount of Provenance information that can be used to track or differentiate the source of information in the resource. The source may identify another FHIR server, document, message, database, etc.

In the provenance resource, this corresponds to Provenance.entity.what[x]. The exact use of the source (and the implied Provenance.entity.role) is left to implementer discretion. Only one nominated source is allowed; for additional provenance details, a full Provenance resource should be used.

This element can be used to indicate where the current master source of a resource that has a canonical URL if the resource is no longer hosted at the canonical URL.

Security labels applied to this resource. These tags connect specific resources to the overall security policy and infrastructure.

The security labels can be updated without changing the stated version of the resource. The list of security labels is a set. Uniqueness is based the system/code, and version and display are ignored.

Tags applied to this resource. Tags are intended to be used to identify and relate resources to process and workflow, and applications are not required to consider the tags when interpreting the meaning of a resource.

The tags can be updated without changing the stated version of the resource. The list of tags is a set. Uniqueness is based the system/code, and version and display are ignored.

Identifier for the List assigned for business purposes outside the context of FHIR.

A label for the list assigned by the author.

Allows customization beyond just the code identifying the kind of list.

Note that FHIR strings SHALL NOT exceed 1MB in size

The version of the code system which was used when choosing this code. Note that a well-maintained code system does not need the version reported, because the meaning of codes is consistent across versions. However this cannot consistently be assured, and when the meaning is not guaranteed to be consistent, the version SHOULD be exchanged.

Where the terminology does not clearly define what string should be used to identify code system versions, the recommendation is to use the date (expressed in FHIR date format) on which that version was officially published as the version date.

A representation of the meaning of the code in the system, following the rules of the system.

Need to be able to carry a human-readable meaning of the code for readers that do not know the system.

Note that FHIR strings SHALL NOT exceed 1MB in size

Indicates that this coding was chosen by a user directly - e.g. off a pick list of available items (codes or displays).

This has been identified as a clinical safety criterium - that this exact system/code pair was chosen explicitly, rather than inferred by the system based on some rules or language processing.

Amongst a set of alternatives, a directly chosen code is the most appropriate starting point for new translations. There is some ambiguity about what exactly 'directly chosen' implies, and trading partner agreement may be needed to clarify the use of this element and its consequences more completely.

A human language representation of the concept as seen/selected/uttered by the user who entered the data and/or which represents the intended meaning of the user.

The codes from the terminologies do not always capture the correct meaning with all the nuances of the human using them, or sometimes there is no appropriate code at all. In these cases, the text is used to capture the full meaning of the source.

Very often the text is the same as a displayName of one of the codings.

The encounter that is the context in which this list was created.

References SHALL be a reference to an actual FHIR resource, and SHALL be resolveable (allowing for access control, temporary unavailability, etc.). Resolution can be either by retrieval from the URL, or, where applicable by resource type, by treating an absolute reference as a canonical URL and looking it up in a local registry/repository.

The date that the list was prepared.

Identifies how current the list is which affects relevance.

The actual important date is the date of currency of the resources that were summarized, but it is usually assumed that these are current when the preparation occurs.

The entity responsible for deciding what the contents of the list were. Where the list was created by a human, this is the same as the author of the list.

Allows follow-up as well as context.

The primary source is the entity that made the decisions what items are in the list. This may be software or user.

What order applies to the items in the list.

Important for presentation and rendering. Lists may be sorted to place more important information first or to group related entries.

Applications SHOULD render ordered lists in the order provided, but MAY allow users to re-order based on their own preferences as well. If there is no order specified, the order is unknown, though there may still be some order.

Comments that apply to the overall list.

For systems that do not have structured annotations, they can simply communicate a single annotation with no author or time. This element may need to be included in narrative because of the potential for modifying information. Annotations SHOULD NOT be used to communicate "modifying" information that could be computable. (This is a SHOULD because enforcing user behavior is nearly impossible).

The flag allows the system constructing the list to indicate the role and significance of the item in the list.

This field is present to support various clinical uses of lists, such as a discharge summary medication list, where flags specify whether the medication was added, modified, or deleted from the list.

The flag can only be understood in the context of the List.code. If the flag means that the entry has actually been deleted from the list, the deleted element SHALL be true. Deleted can only be used if the List.mode is "changes".

True if this item is marked as deleted in the list.

The flag element may contain codes that an application processing the list does not understand. However there can be no ambiguity if a list item is actually marked as "deleted".

If the flag means that the entry has actually been deleted from the list, the deleted element SHALL be true. Both flag and deleted can only be used if the List.mode is "changes". A deleted entry should be displayed in narrative as deleted. This element is labeled as a modifier because it indicates that an item is (to be) no longer in the list.

List items are generally only treated as deleted when this element explicitly carries a value of true. Systems SHOULD always populate this value when mode is 'changes'

When this item was added to the list.

The date may be significant for understanding the meaning of items in a working list.

If the list is empty, why the list is empty.

Allows capturing things like "none exist" or "not asked" which can be important for most lists.

The various reasons for an empty list make a significant interpretation to its interpretation. Note that this code is for use when the entire list has been suppressed, and not for when individual items are omitted - implementers may consider using a text note or a flag on an entry in these cases.