Add Resource.text (Narrative) guidance to FHIR IG
Description
Verduidelijking van Impact
Proposed solution (NL)
As documented in the initial issue comment.
https://informatiestandaarden.nictiz.nl/wiki/MedMij:Vissue-MM-1050_FHIR_IG#Resource.text
Note: the mapping stack contains an active narrative generator so everything passing a mapping already has a narrative in compliance with this guidance. The Qualification materials have all been updated under https://github.com/Nictiz/Nictiz-STU3-testscripts/tree/MM-1050/FHIR3-0-2-MM202001-Dev and are ready for merge into the production branch
Proposed solution (EN)
Release notes (NL)
The FHIR specification on Resource.text is not completely clear and found multi interpretable. Therefore, additional explanation and guidance on this subject is added to the MedMij FHIR IG.
Release notes (EN)
is related to
Activity
Voorstel is uitgewerkt op https://informatiestandaarden.nictiz.nl/wiki/MedMij:Vissue-MM-1050_FHIR_IG
Suggestion by Grahame:
You probably want some words there around due diligence. an application might casually assume that they do't have documented use cases, and just use the narrative. I''m saying that they should be accountable to make sure they've investigated it but how much they should and who is accountable to who will be context and culture specific.
— initial response —
We are in a pretty controlled context where there is no drive by interoperability so if you are using FHIR, you'll have an IG to guide you why and how. That being said, the same artifacts are also used outside what we define, for example in interfacing a data warehouse in one of our biggest hospitals and supporting a patient portal in a specialist hospital. If and how they deal with narrative based on our profiles which I know they use (they are designed as generic) is up to them. This guidance here is specific to the MedMij set of use cases for the same generic profiles. I'll chew some on your suggestion for due diligence and see how best to wordsmith that.
Relevant Zulip discussion on topic: https://chat.fhir.org/#narrow/stream/179181-netherlands/topic/Guidance.20on.20Resource.2Etext
In qualification testing we experience that the generic FHIR Core guidance around DomainResource.text is not clear enough. We should expand on that generic guidance for our purposes. Based on issue MM-865, propose to add the following to the FHIR IG as overarching principle:
Resource.text
Any FHIR Resource that derives from DomainResource supports the text element. This text element has datatype Narrative. Only few resources derive from something other than DomainResource. One such example is Binary. FHIR STU3 says the following about DomainResource.text:
Datatype Narrative further expands on what "clinically safe" entails and gives more guidance, such as:
Datatype Narrative also defines types of narrative based on their status code with choices generated, extensions, additional and empty.
Status extensions says "The contents of the narrative are entirely generated from the structured data in the content and some of the content is generated from extensions". This implementation guide expects this to be the common case as most resources can have extension content defined on them. Even if this particular resource instance does not have extension contents, the status code "extensions" still applies. Note that it is of the utmost importance to include modifier extensions in the narrative as they always affect the semantics. Receivers MAY choose to render this narrative as opposed to or in addition to rendering the structured data and/or (modifier) extensions.
Status generated says "The contents of the narrative are entirely generated from the structured data in the content." This implementation guide expects this to be a common case where the sender did not anticipate inclusion of regular extension content into the narrative. Note that it is of the utmost importance to still include modifier extensions in the narrative as they always affect the semantics. Receivers MAY choose to render this narrative as opposed to or in addition to rendering the structured data and/or (modifier) extensions.
Status empty says "No human-readable text provided in this case" and thus basically provides the opposite of "clinically safe" or human readable. This implementation guide does not anticipate a use case for this status code and senders SHOULD NOT use it unless explicitly documented why, e.g. in an information standard. When a receiver encounters such a narrative there is simply nothing he can do with it.
Status additional says "The contents of the narrative may contain additional information not found in the structured data. Note that there is no computable way to determine what the extra information is, other than by human inspection". Again this implementation guide does not anticipate a use case for this status code and senders SHOULD NOT use it unless explicitly documented why in an information standard. When a receiver encounters such a narrative it SHALL treat the information like any other extension: Receiver SHALL support it in accordance with explicitly documented use in the information standard. Receiver MAY support it if it is not explicitly documented. Receiver SHALL, upon supporting status 'additional' make clear to the user that the information is a fragment, and not the entire thing in any way it sees fit.
The expectations for Resource.text or narratives within the context of this implementation guide:
Sender SHALL provide "clinically safe" Resource.text of status extensions (preferred) or generated, unless explicitly documented in the relevant information standard to do otherwise or unless the resource does not support narrative
Receiver MAY support Resource.text. If they do, this SHALL be in accordance with the status and explicitly documented use in the relevant information standard
Receiver SHALL NOT generically depend on presence of a clinically safe narrative as their only means to present data to users when an explicitly documented use case for status empty or additional exists. Also using just the narrative you would not expect to produce graphs, support medication alerts and other functionality
Informal note: Producing a "clinically safe" narrative can be cumbersome. Various reference frameworks like HAPI include a Narrative Generator of some sort.