This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
Difference between revisions of "CSCR-050 Make ObservationRange.negationInd and Criterion.negationInd optional"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
RikSmithies (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
== Discussion == | == Discussion == | ||
| − | + | Negation is a liabilty. If not using SNOMED you still need to say it. | |
== Recommended Action Items == | == Recommended Action Items == | ||
Revision as of 22:22, 2 March 2006
Editing of Change Requests is restricted to the submitter and the co-chairs of the Clinical Statement Project. Other changes will be undone. Please add comments to the "discussion" page associated with this Change Request.
Back to Clinical Statement Change Requests page.
| Submitted by: Rik Smithies | Revision date: 12-Feb-2006 |
| Submitted date: 12-Feb-2006 | Change request ID: CSCR-050 |
Issue
ObservationRange.negationInd and Criterion.negationInd are [1..1] required
Recommendation
- Change ObservationRange.negationInd and Criterion.negationInd to be [0..1] optional
Rationale
Terminfo guidance and thinking in NHS/UK domain, rules out the use of negationInd when act.code contains a code from a scheme that already encompasses negation (eg SnomedCT). Currently negationInd cannot be refined out in models that mandate such a coding scheme, leading to potential inconsistency.
Discussion
Negation is a liabilty. If not using SNOMED you still need to say it.
