Hi everyone, Bert, here in Brazil we are facing the same situation. We are supposed to bind the openEHR-EHR-EVALUATION.problem_diagnosis.v1 problem/diagnosis name element to both ICD10 and ICPC2 code systems, so at runtime the professional can use the locally preferred terminology. Since it doesn't seem to be possible through Template Designer, we tried to implement it on the archetype just like you. So far we are not working with ADL, but when exporting the operational template and XML schema, the resulting file would be constrained to just one binding. Besides that, the terminology_id ends up with a fixed value of "local" on the XML schema. Are we missing something or could it be a bug? Something related to OPT serialization or XSD transformation? Did anyone ever experience this?
Thank you so much for your attention. Cheers, Ricardo Gonçalves. 2017-03-15 13:00 GMT-03:00 <openehr-clinical-requ...@lists.openehr.org>: > Send openEHR-clinical mailing list submissions to > openehr-clinical@lists.openehr.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr- > clinical_lists.openehr.org > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > openehr-clinical-requ...@lists.openehr.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > openehr-clinical-ow...@lists.openehr.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of openEHR-clinical digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Problem with constraint_binding (Bert Verhees) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 11:21:18 +0000 > From: Bert Verhees <bert.verh...@rosa.nl> > To: For openEHR clinical discussions > <openehr-clinical@lists.openehr.org> > Subject: Re: Problem with constraint_binding > Message-ID: > <CAFL--x9706T8FTuhtJuJEB6Zhcvxdn5Z0iSrFivvsv= > xyiv...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Thanks Ian, that explains. > > Best regard > Bert > > Op wo 15 mrt. 2017 om 12:14 schreef Ian McNicoll <i...@freshehr.com>: > > > Hi Bert > > > > This is correct. If you were to add those constraints in a specialised > > archetype, at run-time the submitted term in the defining_code attribute > > would have to come from one of the two terminologies specified. > > > > The constraint can define multiple potential terminologies but only one > > defining_code is allowed in the instance data. > > > > Ian > > On Wed, 15 Mar 2017 at 10:29, Bert Verhees <bert.verh...@rosa.nl> wrote: > > > > Dear readers, > > > > I have a problem and I want to ask your advise. > > > > The problem is that I want to > > use openEHR-EHR-EVALUATION.problem_diagnosis.v1 which is in CKM. > > > > In that archetype is the item "Problem/Diagnosis name", which is of type > > DV_TEXT. We want to use it as DV_CODED_TEXT, because we want to add code > to > > the entered name. > > > > In this situation where I work, the customer wants to use 2 different > > codes, one company crerated internal codelist, and ICD10. > > > > It seems easy to arrange in the archetype, I think I need to specialize > > it, because I want to add the constraint-bindings to give room for the > > codes. The archetype-editor from Ocean allows two constraint-bindings on > > the same node, like displayed below. But this seems wrong to me. > > > > In the reference model in the DV_CODED_TEXT is one CODE_PHRASE (1..1). > And > > CODE_PHRASE has terminology_id and code_string also 1..1 > > > > So how will the construct below be interpreted following the specs? > > > > constraint_bindings = < > > ["ETDA"] = < > > items = < > > ["ac0001"] = <terminology:ETDA> > > > > > > > > ["ICD10"] = < > > items = < > > ["ac0001"] = <terminology:ICD10> > > > > > > > > > > > > > My second question, if you say this is impossible to add two terminology > > constraints to one data-item, which construct do you advise to make two > > terminology constraints_bindings available to one DV_CODED_TEXT (or maybe > > another datavalue-type)? > > > > Thanks for any help. > > > > Best regards > > Bert Verhees > > > > _______________________________________________ > > openEHR-clinical mailing list > > openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org > > > > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr- > clinical_lists.openehr.org > > > > -- > > Ian McNicoll > > _______________________________________________ > > openEHR-clinical mailing list > > openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org > > > > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr- > clinical_lists.openehr.org > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-clinical_ > lists.openehr.org/attachments/20170315/2e4cdb1b/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-clinical mailing list > openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr- > clinical_lists.openehr.org > > ------------------------------ > > End of openEHR-clinical Digest, Vol 58, Issue 10 > ************************************************ >
_______________________________________________ openEHR-clinical mailing list openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org
