Difference between revisions of "Procedure Referral Workgroup Mission Statement"

From Health Level 7 Belgium Wiki
 
(4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
'''''DISCLAIMER: EVERYTHING ON THIS PAGE SHALL BE CONSIDERED DRAFT AS LONG AS THIS DISCLAIMER REMAINS PRESENT. - THIS PAGE WILL BE DISCUSSED DURING THE PROCEDURE REFERRAL WG.'''''
+
'''DISCLAIMER: EVERYTHING ON THIS PAGE SHALL BE CONSIDERED DRAFT AS LONG AS THIS DISCLAIMER REMAINS PRESENT. - THIS PAGE IS ONGOING DISCUSSED DURING THE PROCEDURE REFERRAL WG.'''<br>
  
This page describes the mission statement of this WG.
+
This latest version of this can be viewed [https://drive.google.com/file/d/1z-pBDYDW0dxG9Qb4b79DHE61PxtnMTss/view here]
  
The mission of the WG is to realize a technical profile in HL7 FHIR format that describes a referral prescription. A 'referral prescription' (RP) is in general any prescription that is not a prescription for medical content e.g. a prescription for diagnostic imaging, a prescription for kinesitherapy treatment or a nursing prescription.
+
''The members of this WG can work on the content that is published on the url above via the link that was sent to them.''
 
 
As such, this WG considers the following points in scope of its mission:
 
* The description of high level use cases detailing the usage of this message.
 
** These use cases will take the flavours of the identified specific use cases that were already identified i.e. in a first phase there will be a focus on diagnostic imaging, kinesitherapy and nursing
 
* The delivery of a logical datamodel of what is to be send in these transactions:
 
** The constituent parts of the RP (e.g. a patient, a practitioner, obervation(s),...)
 
** The actual content of these parts (e.g. cardinalities, where and which codesystems shall be used,...)
 
* The delivery of FHIR artefacts profiling the appropriate resources to make this datamodel possible in FHIR
 
 
 
This WG considers these points explicitly out of scope:
 
* Architectural decisions how this message will be send (e.g. SOAP message, REST interface,...)
 
* Decisions around use of as-is or to-be developed solutions to send this message (e.g. use of eHealth box, regional vaults,...)
 
* Detailed semantic studies to determine subsets of codesystems (e.g. a SNOMED-CT subset to define a list of pathologies,...)
 

Latest revision as of 14:26, 14 May 2020

DISCLAIMER: EVERYTHING ON THIS PAGE SHALL BE CONSIDERED DRAFT AS LONG AS THIS DISCLAIMER REMAINS PRESENT. - THIS PAGE IS ONGOING DISCUSSED DURING THE PROCEDURE REFERRAL WG.

This latest version of this can be viewed here

The members of this WG can work on the content that is published on the url above via the link that was sent to them.