ReteLabDiagnosticReportRisultatiDisponibili

The purpose of this identifier.

Allows the appropriate identifier for a particular context of use to be selected from among a set of identifiers.

Applications can assume that an identifier is permanent unless it explicitly says that it is temporary.

A coded type for the identifier that can be used to determine which identifier to use for a specific purpose.

Allows users to make use of identifiers when the identifier system is not known.

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.

Time period during which identifier is/was valid for use.

A Period specifies a range of time; the context of use will specify whether the entire range applies (e.g. "the patient was an inpatient of the hospital for this time range") or one value from the range applies (e.g. "give to the patient between these two times").

Period is not used for a duration (a measure of elapsed time). See Duration.

Organization that issued/manages the identifier.

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.

The identification of the code system that defines the meaning of the symbol in the code.

Need to be unambiguous about the source of the definition of the symbol.

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.

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.

Indicates that this coding was chosen by a user directly - e.g. off a pick list of available items (codes or displays).

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.

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.

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.

Very often the text is the same as a displayName of one of the codings.

The subject of the report. Usually, but not always, this is a patient. However, diagnostic services also perform analyses on specimens collected from a variety of other sources.

SHALL know the subject context.

References SHALL be a reference to an actual FHIR resource, and SHALL be resolveable (allowing for access control, temporary unavailability, etc.). Resolution can be either by retrieval from the URL, or, where applicable by resource type, by treating an absolute reference as a canonical URL and looking it up in a local registry/repository.

The healthcare event (e.g. a patient and healthcare provider interaction) which this DiagnosticReport is about.

Links the request to the Encounter context.

This will typically be the encounter the event occurred within, but some events may be initiated prior to or after the official completion of an encounter but still be tied to the context of the encounter (e.g. pre-admission laboratory tests).

The date and time that this version of the report was made available to providers, typically after the report was reviewed and verified.

Clinicians need to be able to check the date that the report was released.

May be different from the update time of the resource itself, because that is the status of the record (potentially a secondary copy), not the actual release time of the report.

The diagnostic service that is responsible for issuing the report.

Need to know whom to contact if there are queries about the results. Also may need to track the source of reports for secondary data analysis.

This is not necessarily the source of the atomic data items or the entity that interpreted the results. It is the entity that takes responsibility for the clinical report.

Details about the specimens on which this diagnostic report is based.

Need to be able to report information about the collected specimens on which the report is based.

If the specimen is sufficiently specified with a code in the test result name, then this additional data may be redundant. If there are multiple specimens, these may be represented per observation or group.

One or more links to full details of any imaging performed during the diagnostic investigation. Typically, this is imaging performed by DICOM enabled modalities, but this is not required. A fully enabled PACS viewer can use this information to provide views of the source images.

ImagingStudy and the image element are somewhat overlapping - typically, the list of image references in the image element will also be found in one of the imaging study resources. However, each caters to different types of displays for different types of purposes. Neither, either, or both may be provided.

A comment about the image. Typically, this is used to provide an explanation for why the image is included, or to draw the viewer's attention to important features.

The provider of the report should make a comment about each image included in the report.

The comment should be displayed with the image. It would be common for the report to include additional discussion of the image contents in other sections such as the conclusion.

Reference to the image source.

References SHALL be a reference to an actual FHIR resource, and SHALL be resolveable (allowing for access control, temporary unavailability, etc.). Resolution can be either by retrieval from the URL, or, where applicable by resource type, by treating an absolute reference as a canonical URL and looking it up in a local registry/repository.

Concise and clinically contextualized summary conclusion (interpretation/impression) of the diagnostic report.

Need to be able to provide a conclusion that is not lost among the basic result data.

Note that FHIR strings SHALL NOT exceed 1MB in size

One or more codes that represent the summary conclusion (interpretation/impression) of the diagnostic report.

Not all terminology uses fit this general pattern. In some cases, models should not use CodeableConcept and use Coding directly and provide their own structure for managing text, codings, translations and the relationship between elements and pre- and post-coordination.

Rich text representation of the entire result as issued by the diagnostic service. Multiple formats are allowed but they SHALL be semantically equivalent.

Gives laboratory the ability to provide its own fully formatted report for clinical fidelity.

"application/pdf" is recommended as the most reliable and interoperable in this context.