Rems200 tirf forms #9
Conversation
KeeyanGhoreshi
left a comment
KeeyanGhoreshi
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The yes/no answers should be booleans and we should try to use valueCoding's whenever we can, strings are not really computable.
| ] | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "linkId": "6.1", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The different groups here either need unique linkId's, or they need to be removed and the first entry should just have repeats: true to indicate that you can answer the question multiple times.
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "linkId": "1.12", | ||
| "text": "Is there a child in the home or are you a caregiver of small children?", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The yes/no questions should be booleans
| "type": "choice", | ||
| "required": true, | ||
| "repeats": true, | ||
| "answerOption": [ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ideally, all of these would be valueCodings instead of strings.
KeeyanGhoreshi
left a comment
KeeyanGhoreshi
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think there was a bit of a miscommunication, only use valueCoding where you can. If you don't have a system and a real code beyond copying the display, there's not much reason to use a valueCoding over a string.
Ideally everything would have a code and a system, but some don't. If you're unsure, a quick google search should pull up any codes associated with a keyword.
| "answerOption": [ | ||
| { | ||
| "valueString": "A. Adult male with advanced lung cancer; underlying persistent cancer pain managed with 25 mcg/hour transdermal fentanyl patches for the past 2 months" | ||
| "valueCoding": { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This does not need to be a valueCoding, it is not something that has a code/codesystem. Moreover, it's a multiple choice assessment style question, there's no reason to have a coding here since we'd only care about the user selecting the correct answer anyway.
This goes for most of the questions in this form.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok I see, I initially thought that valueCoding was only for fields that had a code system and corresponding value set, but I noticed that the Turalio forms used valueCoding for arbitrary/custom answer options, and so I just replaced all valueStrings with codings
| "answerOption": [ | ||
| { | ||
| "valueString": "MD" | ||
| "valueCoding": { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These are correctly valueCodings, but need their codeSystem in order to be valid: http://www.hl7.org/fhir/v2/0360/2.7/index.html
You can leave "Other" as it is.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would I need to use an extension of sorts to have the code system be registered?
| "answerOption": [ | ||
| { | ||
| "valueString": "Morning" | ||
| "valueCoding": { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This can be a string, though it could also probably be a code I don't think it needs to be since it isn't included as information in any fhir resources.
| "answerOption": [ | ||
| { | ||
| "valueString": "Text to Mobile #" | ||
| "valueCoding": { |
| { | ||
| "valueString": "Text to Mobile #" | ||
| "valueCoding": { | ||
| "code": "Text to Mobile #", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the codes for these can be found here: https://build.fhir.org/valueset-contact-point-system.html
| "valueCoding": { | ||
| "code": "Text to Mobile #", | ||
| "code": "sms", | ||
| "system": "http://hl7.org/fhir/ValueSet/contact-point-system", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The code system is http://hl7.org/fhir/contact-point-system without the "ValueSet"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure how that got in there, but I'll be sure to push that change up
removed incorrectly spelled file
Please don't hesitate to make note of any issues and/or preference changes