Simple app consent profile: Patient X consented/refused to share information with Application Y (represented as a Device). This profile models consent for a patient to sign up with an app.
Elements / Details
Every element this profile touches, with its full definition. Element names in the tables link here.
Patient consent for app signup and data sharing Core
Definition
Records whether a patient consented to or refused to sign up with a specific app and share data.
This models the consent process when a patient decides to use a third-party application.
The application is represented as a NexusEmrCoreAppDevice resource.
This is one of three Consent families sharing one store, and they all read the same way. The
decision is provision.type on the root provision -- permit grants, deny restricts -- and
status says only whether the record is operative. All three carry scope = patient-privacy, so
scope separates nothing; category is required and searchable and says WHAT a decision governs.
See the Consent Family code system.
Comments
Broadly, there are 3 key areas of consent for patients: Consent around sharing information (aka Privacy Consent Directive - Authorization to Collect, Use, or Disclose information), consent for specific treatment, or kinds of treatment, and general advance care directives.
The metadata about the resource. This is content that is maintained by the infrastructure. Changes to the content might not always be associated with version changes to the resource.
May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the element. To make the use of extensions safe and manageable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer can define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension.
Comments
There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.
The version specific identifier, as it appears in the version portion of the URL. This value changes when the resource is created, updated, or deleted.
Comments
The server assigns this value, and ignores what the client specifies, except in the case that the server is imposing version integrity on updates/deletes.
When the resource last changed - e.g. when the version changed.
Comments
This value is always populated except when the resource is first being created. The server / resource manager sets this value; what a client provides is irrelevant. This is equivalent to the HTTP Last-Modified and SHOULD have the same value on a read interaction.
Identifies EMR instance & pipeline version the resource came from
Definition
A URI that identifies the EMR pipeline and version from which this resource originated. This tells you which EMR instance (recommend using the instance identifier), and the version of the pipeline code/transformations.
Comments
In the provenance resource, this corresponds to Provenance.entity.what[x]. The exact use of the source (and the implied Provenance.entity.role) is left to implementer discretion. Only one nominated source is allowed; for additional provenance details, a full Provenance resource should be used.
This element can be used to indicate where the current master source of a resource that has a canonical URL if the resource is no longer hosted at the canonical URL.
It is up to the server and/or other infrastructure of policy to determine whether/how these claims are verified and/or updated over time. The list of profile URLs is a set.
Security labels applied to this resource. These tags connect specific resources to the overall security policy and infrastructure.
Comments
The security labels can be updated without changing the stated version of the resource. The list of security labels is a set. Uniqueness is based the system/code, and version and display are ignored.
Tags applied to this resource. Tags are intended to be used to identify and relate resources to process and workflow, and applications are not required to consider the tags when interpreting the meaning of a resource.
Comments
The tags can be updated without changing the stated version of the resource. The list of tags is a set. Uniqueness is based the system/code, and version and display are ignored.
A set of rules under which this content was created
Definition
A reference to a set of rules that were followed when the resource was constructed, and which must be understood when processing the content. Often, this is a reference to an implementation guide that defines the special rules along with other profiles etc.
Comments
Asserting this rule set restricts the content to be only understood by a limited set of trading partners. This inherently limits the usefulness of the data in the long term. However, the existing health eco-system is highly fractured, and not yet ready to define, collect, and exchange data in a generally computable sense. Wherever possible, implementers and/or specification writers should avoid using this element. Often, when used, the URL is a reference to an implementation guide that defines these special rules as part of it's narrative along with other profiles, value sets, etc.
Cardinality
0..1
Type
uri
Modifier
yes — This element is labeled as a modifier because the implicit rules may provide additional knowledge about the resource that modifies it's meaning or interpretation
The base language in which the resource is written.
Comments
Language is provided to support indexing and accessibility (typically, services such as text to speech use the language tag). The html language tag in the narrative applies to the narrative. The language tag on the resource may be used to specify the language of other presentations generated from the data in the resource. Not all the content has to be in the base language. The Resource.language should not be assumed to apply to the narrative automatically. If a language is specified, it should it also be specified on the div element in the html (see rules in HTML5 for information about the relationship between xml:lang and the html lang attribute).
Text summary of the resource, for human interpretation
Definition
A human-readable narrative that contains a summary of the resource and can be used to represent the content of the resource to a human. The narrative need not encode all the structured data, but is required to contain sufficient detail to make it "clinically safe" for a human to just read the narrative. Resource definitions may define what content should be represented in the narrative to ensure clinical safety.
Comments
Contained resources do not have narrative. Resources that are not contained SHOULD have a narrative. In some cases, a resource may only have text with little or no additional discrete data (as long as all minOccurs=1 elements are satisfied). This may be necessary for data from legacy systems where information is captured as a "text blob" or where text is additionally entered raw or narrated and encoded information is added later.
These resources do not have an independent existence apart from the resource that contains them - they cannot be identified independently, and nor can they have their own independent transaction scope.
Comments
This should never be done when the content can be identified properly, as once identification is lost, it is extremely difficult (and context dependent) to restore it again. Contained resources may have profiles and tags In their meta elements, but SHALL NOT have security labels.
May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the resource. To make the use of extensions safe and manageable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer can define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension.
Comments
There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.
May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the resource and that modifies the understanding of the element that contains it and/or the understanding of the containing element's descendants. Usually modifier elements provide negation or qualification. To make the use of extensions safe and manageable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer is allowed to define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension. Applications processing a resource are required to check for modifier extensions.
Modifier extensions SHALL NOT change the meaning of any elements on Resource or DomainResource (including cannot change the meaning of modifierExtension itself).
Requirements
Modifier extensions allow for extensions that cannot be safely ignored to be clearly distinguished from the vast majority of extensions which can be safely ignored. This promotes interoperability by eliminating the need for implementers to prohibit the presence of extensions. For further information, see the definition of modifier extensions.
Comments
There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.
Cardinality
0..*
Type
Extension
Modifier
yes — Modifier extensions are expected to modify the meaning or interpretation of the resource that contains them
Unique identifiers for the app consent.
A business identifier is recommended but not required (identifier is 0..*). Where available, carry the source-system identifier using the most appropriate system URI. No specific canonical system is mandated.
A source system's own identifier SHOULD be carried alongside this one, flagged use = secondary. See Carrying the raw code.
Comments
This identifier identifies this copy of the consent. Where this identifier is also used elsewhere as the identifier for a consent record (e.g. a CDA consent document) then the consent details are expected to be the same.
May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the element. To make the use of extensions safe and manageable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer can define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension.
Comments
There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.
A coded type for the identifier that can be used to determine which identifier to use for a specific purpose.
Requirements
Allows users to make use of identifiers when the identifier system is not known.
Comments
This element deals only with general categories of identifiers. It SHOULD not be used for codes that correspond 1..1 with the Identifier.system. Some identifiers may fall into multiple categories due to common usage. Where the system is known, a type is unnecessary because the type is always part of the system definition. However systems often need to handle identifiers where the system is not known. There is not a 1:1 relationship between type and system, since many different systems have the same type.
Establishes the namespace for the value - that is, a URL that describes a set values that are unique.
Requirements
There are many sets of identifiers. To perform matching of two identifiers, we need to know what set we're dealing with. The system identifies a particular set of unique identifiers.
The portion of the identifier typically relevant to the user and which is unique within the context of the system.
Comments
If the value is a full URI, then the system SHALL be urn:ietf:rfc:3986. The value's primary purpose is computational mapping. As a result, it may be normalized for comparison purposes (e.g. removing non-significant whitespace, dashes, etc.) A value formatted for human display can be conveyed using the Rendered Value extension. Identifier.value is to be treated as case sensitive unless knowledge of the Identifier.system allows the processer to be confident that non-case-sensitive processing is safe.
The Identifier.assigner may omit the .reference element and only contain a .display element reflecting the name or other textual information about the assigning organization.
Required field in FHIR R4 Consent. Indicates the current state of this app consent.
Requirements
The Consent Directive that is pointed to might be in various lifecycle states, e.g., a revoked Consent Directive.
Comments
This element is labeled as a modifier because the status contains the codes rejected and entered-in-error that mark the Consent as not currently valid.
Cardinality
1..1
Type
code
Must Support
yes
Modifier
yes — This element is labelled as a modifier because it is a status element that contains status entered-in-error which means that the resource should not be treated as valid
Required field in FHIR R4 Consent. For this app consent use case, always set to 'patient-privacy' as we're dealing with patient privacy consent for app data sharing.
Cardinality
1..1
Type
CodeableConcept
Must Support
yes
Modifier
yes — Allows changes to codes based on scope selection
INFA (information access), plus the Consent family code
Definition
Required field in FHIR R4 Consent. This profile carries two codings, in two slices discriminated by
code system, and neither substitutes for the other.
infa says WHAT this consent governs: v3-ActCode#INFA, information access — a third-party
application's access to patient information.
family says this Consent is an app consent. Three Consent families share this store, one
GET Consent?patient={id} returns them mixed, and all three carry scope = patient-privacy — so
category is the only element that separates them, and every family in this guide carries the
family code. Select this family with:
GET Consent?patient={id}&category=../CodeSystem/nexus-consent-family|app
The slicing is open, so further categories may be carried alongside these two. No other category
identifies the access class or the family, and a consumer MUST NOT infer either from one.
Comments
The family coding sits outside HL7's consent-category value set on purpose, as it does on the
sibling Consent profiles: that value set classifies consent documents and has no concept for this
guide's own family axis. The required binding to it therefore sits on the infa slice, where it
holds, rather than on category as a whole, where it would make the family coding non-conformant.
Terminology-aware validators may note that the base extensible binding is unmet on the family
coding; that note is expected, not a defect.
What this consent governs: access to patient information by a third-party app. Always v3-ActCode#INFA.
Comments
The family coding sits outside HL7's consent-category value set on purpose, as it does on the
sibling Consent profiles: that value set classifies consent documents and has no concept for this
guide's own family axis. The required binding to it therefore sits on the infa slice, where it
holds, rather than on category as a whole, where it would make the family coding non-conformant.
Terminology-aware validators may note that the base extensible binding is unmet on the family
coding; that note is expected, not a defect.
May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the element. To make the use of extensions safe and manageable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer can define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension.
Comments
There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.
A reference to a code defined by a terminology system.
Requirements
Allows for alternative encodings within a code system, and translations to other code systems.
Comments
Codes may be defined very casually in enumerations, or code lists, up to very formal definitions such as SNOMED CT - see the HL7 v3 Core Principles for more information. Ordering of codings is undefined and SHALL NOT be used to infer meaning. Generally, at most only one of the coding values will be labeled as UserSelected = true.
May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the element. To make the use of extensions safe and manageable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer can define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension.
Comments
There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.
The identification of the code system that defines the meaning of the symbol in the code.
Requirements
Need to be unambiguous about the source of the definition of the symbol.
Comments
The URI may be an OID (urn:oid:...) or a UUID (urn:uuid:...). OIDs and UUIDs SHALL be references to the HL7 OID registry. Otherwise, the URI should come from HL7's list of FHIR defined special URIs or it should reference to some definition that establishes the system clearly and unambiguously.
The version of the code system which was used when choosing this code. Note that a well-maintained code system does not need the version reported, because the meaning of codes is consistent across versions. However this cannot consistently be assured, and when the meaning is not guaranteed to be consistent, the version SHOULD be exchanged.
Comments
Where the terminology does not clearly define what string should be used to identify code system versions, the recommendation is to use the date (expressed in FHIR date format) on which that version was officially published as the version date.
A symbol in syntax defined by the system. The symbol may be a predefined code or an expression in a syntax defined by the coding system (e.g. post-coordination).
Indicates that this coding was chosen by a user directly - e.g. off a pick list of available items (codes or displays).
Requirements
This has been identified as a clinical safety criterium - that this exact system/code pair was chosen explicitly, rather than inferred by the system based on some rules or language processing.
Comments
Amongst a set of alternatives, a directly chosen code is the most appropriate starting point for new translations. There is some ambiguity about what exactly 'directly chosen' implies, and trading partner agreement may be needed to clarify the use of this element and its consequences more completely.
A human language representation of the concept as seen/selected/uttered by the user who entered the data and/or which represents the intended meaning of the user.
Requirements
The codes from the terminologies do not always capture the correct meaning with all the nuances of the human using them, or sometimes there is no appropriate code at all. In these cases, the text is used to capture the full meaning of the source.
Comments
Very often the text is the same as a displayName of one of the codings.
The family this Consent belongs to, fixed to app. It tells a consumer which interpretation
contract governs the resource in its hand before the resource is interpreted, which is the point of
carrying it on a searchable element: a mixed result can be partitioned in the search rather than
after it.
It says WHAT this decision governs and nothing about how to read it. The decision is
provision.type in every family, so a reader never needs the family code to answer the dangerous
question — it answers the cheap one.
Comments
The binding is required, not extensible: the value of this element is that a consumer can enumerate
the families it knows how to interpret and refuse the ones it does not. A family minted under a
deployment's own system would arrive looking like a known one, which is the failure the element
exists to prevent.
May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the element. To make the use of extensions safe and manageable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer can define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension.
Comments
There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.
A reference to a code defined by a terminology system.
Requirements
Allows for alternative encodings within a code system, and translations to other code systems.
Comments
Codes may be defined very casually in enumerations, or code lists, up to very formal definitions such as SNOMED CT - see the HL7 v3 Core Principles for more information. Ordering of codings is undefined and SHALL NOT be used to infer meaning. Generally, at most only one of the coding values will be labeled as UserSelected = true.
May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the element. To make the use of extensions safe and manageable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer can define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension.
Comments
There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.
The identification of the code system that defines the meaning of the symbol in the code.
Requirements
Need to be unambiguous about the source of the definition of the symbol.
Comments
The URI may be an OID (urn:oid:...) or a UUID (urn:uuid:...). OIDs and UUIDs SHALL be references to the HL7 OID registry. Otherwise, the URI should come from HL7's list of FHIR defined special URIs or it should reference to some definition that establishes the system clearly and unambiguously.
The version of the code system which was used when choosing this code. Note that a well-maintained code system does not need the version reported, because the meaning of codes is consistent across versions. However this cannot consistently be assured, and when the meaning is not guaranteed to be consistent, the version SHOULD be exchanged.
Comments
Where the terminology does not clearly define what string should be used to identify code system versions, the recommendation is to use the date (expressed in FHIR date format) on which that version was officially published as the version date.
A symbol in syntax defined by the system. The symbol may be a predefined code or an expression in a syntax defined by the coding system (e.g. post-coordination).
Indicates that this coding was chosen by a user directly - e.g. off a pick list of available items (codes or displays).
Requirements
This has been identified as a clinical safety criterium - that this exact system/code pair was chosen explicitly, rather than inferred by the system based on some rules or language processing.
Comments
Amongst a set of alternatives, a directly chosen code is the most appropriate starting point for new translations. There is some ambiguity about what exactly 'directly chosen' implies, and trading partner agreement may be needed to clarify the use of this element and its consequences more completely.
A human language representation of the concept as seen/selected/uttered by the user who entered the data and/or which represents the intended meaning of the user.
Requirements
The codes from the terminologies do not always capture the correct meaning with all the nuances of the human using them, or sometimes there is no appropriate code at all. In these cases, the text is used to capture the full meaning of the source.
Comments
Very often the text is the same as a displayName of one of the codings.
Either the Grantor, which is the entity responsible for granting the rights listed in a Consent Directive or the Grantee, which is the entity responsible for complying with the Consent Directive, including any obligations or limitations on authorizations and enforcement of prohibitions.
Comments
Commonly, the patient the consent pertains to is the consentor, but particularly for young and old people, it may be some other person - e.g. a legal guardian.
The source on which this consent statement is based. The source might be a scanned original paper form, or a reference to a consent that links back to such a source, a reference to a document repository (e.g. XDS) that stores the original consent document.
Comments
The source can be contained inline (Attachment), referenced directly (Consent), referenced in a consent repository (DocumentReference), or simply by an identifier (Identifier), e.g. a CDA document id.
The original consent document in the form of an attachment (text/base64/etc). Optional but useful for maintaining a record of the actual signed consent form.
Comments
The source can be contained inline (Attachment), referenced directly (Consent), referenced in a consent repository (DocumentReference), or simply by an identifier (Identifier), e.g. a CDA document id.
A URI identifying the policy under which this consent is recorded -- the custodian's published
privacy policy, or the statutory provision that governs the decision.
R4's ppc-1 invariant requires either policy or policyRule; this element satisfies it.
policyRule is not used, and the reason is a correction. Earlier releases fixed policyRule
to consentpolicycodes#cric. That code is 45 CFR 46 -- the United States Common Rule for
informed consent in human-subjects research. It is not a communication-preference policy, not a
data-sharing policy, and not Canadian. It was never the right value here, and the code system it
comes from contains no Canadian concept at all: its 27 codes are US federal and state instruments
plus three European ones. Rather than substitute another wrong code, this profile names the actual
governing policy by URI, which is both truthful and machine-readable.
May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the element. To make the use of extensions safe and manageable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer can define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension.
Comments
There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.
Extensions that cannot be ignored even if unrecognized
Definition
May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the element and that modifies the understanding of the element in which it is contained and/or the understanding of the containing element's descendants. Usually modifier elements provide negation or qualification. To make the use of extensions safe and manageable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer can define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension. Applications processing a resource are required to check for modifier extensions.
Modifier extensions SHALL NOT change the meaning of any elements on Resource or DomainResource (including cannot change the meaning of modifierExtension itself).
Requirements
Modifier extensions allow for extensions that cannot be safely ignored to be clearly distinguished from the vast majority of extensions which can be safely ignored. This promotes interoperability by eliminating the need for implementers to prohibit the presence of extensions. For further information, see the definition of modifier extensions.
Comments
There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.
Cardinality
0..*
Type
Extension
Modifier
yes — Modifier extensions are expected to modify the meaning or interpretation of the element that contains them
The references to the policies that are included in this consent scope. Policies may be organizational, but are often defined jurisdictionally, or in law.
Comments
This element is for discoverability / documentation and does not modify or qualify the policy rules.
May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the element. To make the use of extensions safe and manageable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer can define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension.
Comments
There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.
Extensions that cannot be ignored even if unrecognized
Definition
May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the element and that modifies the understanding of the element in which it is contained and/or the understanding of the containing element's descendants. Usually modifier elements provide negation or qualification. To make the use of extensions safe and manageable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer can define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension. Applications processing a resource are required to check for modifier extensions.
Modifier extensions SHALL NOT change the meaning of any elements on Resource or DomainResource (including cannot change the meaning of modifierExtension itself).
Requirements
Modifier extensions allow for extensions that cannot be safely ignored to be clearly distinguished from the vast majority of extensions which can be safely ignored. This promotes interoperability by eliminating the need for implementers to prohibit the presence of extensions. For further information, see the definition of modifier extensions.
Comments
There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.
Cardinality
0..*
Type
Extension
Modifier
yes — Modifier extensions are expected to modify the meaning or interpretation of the element that contains them
Carries whether the patient agreed to share with this application, and names the application.
provision.type = permit is agreement; deny is refusal. A grant is now a positive statement
rather than the absence of a nested denial.
May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the element. To make the use of extensions safe and manageable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer can define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension.
Comments
There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.
Extensions that cannot be ignored even if unrecognized
Definition
May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the element and that modifies the understanding of the element in which it is contained and/or the understanding of the containing element's descendants. Usually modifier elements provide negation or qualification. To make the use of extensions safe and manageable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer can define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension. Applications processing a resource are required to check for modifier extensions.
Modifier extensions SHALL NOT change the meaning of any elements on Resource or DomainResource (including cannot change the meaning of modifierExtension itself).
Requirements
Modifier extensions allow for extensions that cannot be safely ignored to be clearly distinguished from the vast majority of extensions which can be safely ignored. This promotes interoperability by eliminating the need for implementers to prohibit the presence of extensions. For further information, see the definition of modifier extensions.
Comments
There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.
Cardinality
0..*
Type
Extension
Modifier
yes — Modifier extensions are expected to modify the meaning or interpretation of the element that contains them
The patient's decision about this application.
Required on the root provision, which diverges from R4's element text and matches IHE PCF,
Ontario's PCOI, and the other Consent profiles in this guide. A consumer reading a Consent that
carries no root type MUST NOT infer permit; treat it as malformed and fail closed.
Refusal was previously a nested provision with type = deny and a grant was the absence of one.
Both are now stated on this element.
May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the element. To make the use of extensions safe and manageable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer can define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension.
Comments
There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.
Extensions that cannot be ignored even if unrecognized
Definition
May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the element and that modifies the understanding of the element in which it is contained and/or the understanding of the containing element's descendants. Usually modifier elements provide negation or qualification. To make the use of extensions safe and manageable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer can define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension. Applications processing a resource are required to check for modifier extensions.
Modifier extensions SHALL NOT change the meaning of any elements on Resource or DomainResource (including cannot change the meaning of modifierExtension itself).
Requirements
Modifier extensions allow for extensions that cannot be safely ignored to be clearly distinguished from the vast majority of extensions which can be safely ignored. This promotes interoperability by eliminating the need for implementers to prohibit the presence of extensions. For further information, see the definition of modifier extensions.
Comments
There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.
Cardinality
0..*
Type
Extension
Modifier
yes — Modifier extensions are expected to modify the meaning or interpretation of the element that contains them
The resource that identifies the actor. To identify actors by type, use group to identify a set of actors by some property they share (e.g. 'admitting officers').
Note that this is the direct action (not the grounds for the action covered in the purpose element). At present, the only action in the understood and tested scope of this resource is 'read'.
A security label, comprised of 0..* security label fields (Privacy tags), which define which resources are controlled by this exception.
Comments
If the consent specifies a security label of "R" then it applies to all resources that are labeled "R" or lower. E.g. for Confidentiality, it's a high water mark. For other kinds of security labels, subsumption logic applies. When the purpose of use tag is on the data, access request purpose of use shall not conflict.
The class of information covered by this rule. The type can be a FHIR resource type, a profile on a type, or a CDA document, or some other type that indicates what sort of information the consent relates to.
Comments
Multiple types are or'ed together. The intention of the contentType element is that the codes refer to profiles or document types defined in a standard or an implementation guide somewhere.
Clinical or Operational Relevant period of time that bounds the data controlled by this rule.
Comments
This has a different sense to the Consent.period - that is when the consent agreement holds. This is the time period of the data that is controlled by the agreement.
May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the element. To make the use of extensions safe and manageable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer can define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension.
Comments
There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.
Extensions that cannot be ignored even if unrecognized
Definition
May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the element and that modifies the understanding of the element in which it is contained and/or the understanding of the containing element's descendants. Usually modifier elements provide negation or qualification. To make the use of extensions safe and manageable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer can define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension. Applications processing a resource are required to check for modifier extensions.
Modifier extensions SHALL NOT change the meaning of any elements on Resource or DomainResource (including cannot change the meaning of modifierExtension itself).
Requirements
Modifier extensions allow for extensions that cannot be safely ignored to be clearly distinguished from the vast majority of extensions which can be safely ignored. This promotes interoperability by eliminating the need for implementers to prohibit the presence of extensions. For further information, see the definition of modifier extensions.
Comments
There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.
Cardinality
0..*
Type
Extension
Modifier
yes — Modifier extensions are expected to modify the meaning or interpretation of the element that contains them