-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Immunizations section involving Medication Dispense reports a false conformance error? #142
Comments
I haven't had time to read all of this but just responding to let you know i've seen it. And, as a note, from a quick scan, the rule this is based off of is from the IG, a few rules down from the 2 you have outlined: |
Also, great work on the documentation in this report! Will be very useful for when I have more time to address. |
I am very sorry this got away from me - and someone else may still yet have to address it - but - has the issue been resolved? |
While cleaning up open issues - we confirmed the validation is correct as per previous comments and agree the structure is confusing
a. SHALL contain exactly one [1..1] @typecode="REFR" (CodeSystem: HL7ActRelationshipType urn:oid:2.16.840.1.113883.5.1002 STATIC) (CONF:1098-7474). b. SHALL contain exactly one [1..1] Medication Supply Order (V2) (identifier: urn:hl7ii:2.16.840.1.113883.10.20.22.4.17:2014-06-09) (CONF:109815606).
|
Hi all, This example defines a medication entry that is divided into two components to support multiple frequencies of medication usage. Question: does ccda validator supports ccda files having multiple components defined in medication entry? Thanks a lot |
When validating a CCDA, the immunizations section reports the following conformance error:
This error comes from the entry/substanceAdministration/medicationDispense subsection. In the example below, I included one mocked product immunization medication information subsection to show a difference between the two medication entries.
Search for the the following tag to directly go to the concern:
<entryRelationship typeCode="REFR">
But according to this ~900 page CCDA doc that I provided below, the doc claims on page 599 that the product/medicationInformation and product/immunizationMedicationInformation subsections are of verb-type MAY; they are optional.
CCDA_MASTER_DOCS.pdf
Here is a screenshot of the section that I am looking at:
and here are further notes on those two subsections, which can also be found on page 600. I'm not seeing that you must have one or the other:
Does the validation tool have a small bug in it? Or does someone happen to have a more up-to-date ccda doc/spec that we could look at? If you would like to use our complete CCDA.xml file to run through your validator on this issue, let me know and I'll provide that.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: