Participation sequence number

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Return to SDTC page; Return to CDA R3 Formal Proposals page.

Submitted by: Ioana Singureanu Revision date: <<Revision Date>>
Submitted date: 11/17/2009 Change request ID: <<Change Request ID>>

Issue

Currently there is no way to specify the order in which participations or act relationships are to be processed. In some cases the order/priority is relevant to processing definitional elements (e.g. privacy rules).

Severity

Low: This is not a critical issue.

Recommendation

  • Add "Participation.sequenceNumber:INT[0..1]" or "ActRelationship.priorityNumber:INT[0..1]"- to all Participation and ActRelationship instances in the document header and entry/clinical statement.

Rationale

Needed for Consent Directive representations and any other information specification that requires the enforcement of a specific order.

Discussion

The item was introduced during the SDWG meeting - Nov. 17th, 2009. Sequencing is available for "organizer" type entries but not of for other entries. This proposal would provide more options to those developing implmementation guides.

Recommended Action Items

Resolution

March 9, 2010: More information needed. Committee doesn't understand why sequenceNumber is needed for ALL participants and act relationships in header (such as on legal authenticator).

April 13, 2010: Will add priorityNumber to CDA Header's generic participant clone (along with an example of how it might be used for NOK). Clinical statement requirements are covered by R3 RIM-based body. Other uses of priorityNumber and sequenceNumber in the header are rejected at this point for lack of use case. Opposed: 0; Abstain: 0; In favor: 7.