Difference between revisions of "Consent in Queries"
Rene spronk (talk | contribs) |
Rene spronk (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
Note on Consent.txt: In terms of the consent model, a more accurate model might be to say that the consent is an instance of a consent definition, where the text of the definition reflects the "form". Alternatively, it could represent the complete filled in form, which would presumably address the subject, performer, etc. | Note on Consent.txt: In terms of the consent model, a more accurate model might be to say that the consent is an instance of a consent definition, where the text of the definition reflects the "form". Alternatively, it could represent the complete filled in form, which would presumably address the subject, performer, etc. | ||
| − | Actions: w/ Bob Dolin, create controlAct R-MIM with Consent, suggest ways to pre-adopt it | + | Actions: |
| + | *w/ Bob Dolin, create controlAct R-MIM with Consent, suggest ways to pre-adopt it. | ||
| + | *Medical Records DSTU: once it goes forward to normative cycle, add solution | ||
Revision as of 20:41, 13 September 2006
This page documents an INM Workitem, i.e. an issue within scope of the INM Committee that either is still being discussed, or the resolution of which has not yet been included in an INM ballot.
Use-case: consent based on
- Legitimate Relationship (UK term), Certificate of Care Relationship (Finnish term). Consent is explicit/implicit related to e.g. the fact the GP has a relationship with a Patient
- Consent form: granting acces to data, created/signed by patient
- Identity of requester, we know/trust requester, have a contract with them
In queries, in Finland may need to send more that just the ID of the consent document instance, or the ID of the Certificate of Care Relationship. Consent may be in central reporsitory, in which case it may be referenced. May require a medical-records (or new, if consent is a mesage model instead of a document) interaction to convey the consent. Depends on level of trust, in NL the ID may be sufficient, because during audit you better have the full document. In US no national provider IDs, no PKI infrastructure, combined with HIPAA makes situation compex. In Canada business rules will vary across 13 provincial jurisdictions.
Emergency override: in v3 terms, see DetectedIssue and DetectedIssueManagament classes in the ControlAct wrapper. Supply a (textual) reason for doing so as well.
DetectedIssueManagement may be based on having consent. Only have consent.id (reference) in wrapper, not full scanned consentform. Have full consent in registry, or in Attachment class in Transmission Wrapper.
Note on Consent.txt: In terms of the consent model, a more accurate model might be to say that the consent is an instance of a consent definition, where the text of the definition reflects the "form". Alternatively, it could represent the complete filled in form, which would presumably address the subject, performer, etc.
Actions:
- w/ Bob Dolin, create controlAct R-MIM with Consent, suggest ways to pre-adopt it.
- Medical Records DSTU: once it goes forward to normative cycle, add solution
