Difference between revisions of "CSCR-050 Make ObservationRange.negationInd and Criterion.negationInd optional"
Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
== Resolution == | == Resolution == | ||
+ | 2 March 2006 | ||
+ | 1stP-M-J, 2nd AK: Accept proposal. Against 0 Abstain 0 For 8 . Approved.Hans Buitendijk, Isobel Frean, Andrew Perry, Rik Smithies; Patrick Mitchell-Jones, Austin Kreisler Heath Frankel, Patrick Lloyd |
Revision as of 22:56, 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.
Recommended Action Items
Resolution
2 March 2006 1stP-M-J, 2nd AK: Accept proposal. Against 0 Abstain 0 For 8 . Approved.Hans Buitendijk, Isobel Frean, Andrew Perry, Rik Smithies; Patrick Mitchell-Jones, Austin Kreisler Heath Frankel, Patrick Lloyd