CSCR-086-PHER-Use Standardized CMETs

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Back to Clinical Statement Change Requests page.

Submitted by: Austin Kreisler Revision date: 11/24/2008
Submitted date: 11/24/2008 Change request ID: CSCR-086

Issue

In many cases, the Clinical Statement Pattern is not using standard CMETs when it should be. This is impeding adoption of the pattern in some domains.

Recommendation

Where a standard CMET already exists for a modeling construct found in clinical statement, use the CMET instead of modeling it separately. This primarily applies to roles and entity based constructs in the model. Examples:

  • LivingSubject choice which contains Person and Animal classes. Replace this construct with the E_LivingSubject universal CMET.
  • Replace Entity (in ConsideredEntity) with the E_PublicHealthEntity universal CMET.
  • Replace the ServiceDeliveryLocation role with the R_ServiceDeliverLocation universal CMET.
  • Replace Organization with the E_Organization universal CMET
  • Replace Place with the E_Place universal CMET

Rationale

Adoption of standard CMETs for specific patterns in the Clinical Statement will speed its adoption by other groups. Clinical statement should be using standard patterns developed by other content committees instead of trying to force non-standard patterns on other work groups.

Discussion

Recommended Action Items

The Clinical Statement work group should adopt the policy that standard CMETs will be used where available for those roles and entities that are not central to the clinical statement.

The following changes are a step in that direction:

  • LivingSubject choice which contains Person and Animal classes. Replace this construct with the E_LivingSubject universal CMET.
  • Replace Entity (in ConsideredEntity) with the E_PublicHealthEntity universal CMET.
  • Replace the ServiceDeliveryLocation role with the R_ServiceDeliverLocation universal CMET.
  • Replace Organization with the E_Organization universal CMET
  • Replace Place with the E_Place universal CMET

Resolution

15-Jan-09 Motion to accept: Austin, Jim

  • Concern that some CMETs may be very large, but still can use constraint versions or use the pieces of the CMET that support the constraint use case.
  • Requires good documentation by owning working group of CMET to clearly document and as necessary provide constraint versions.
  • Change R_ServiceDeliverLocation to R_ServiceDeliveryLocation.

Against: 0; Abstain: 2; In Favor: 21

12-Feb-09 Concern raised as attempting to apply is that the CMETs are more constrained then what the current model allows for, or introduce more ambiguity. Charlie will clarify where specifically these concerns exist.