The current description of the condition-partOf extension needs to be clarified. High blood pressure is not part of diabetes. It may be frequently present together, synergistic risk factors, but not "part-of".

The underlying question, though, is whether condition-partOf is appropriate within the following use cases:

A) A patient has 10 occurrences of acute otitis diagnoses across 10 encounters. Each occurrence is represented as a Condition with category = encounter-diagnosis, coded with ICD-10. There is also an 11th chronic otitis condition, with category = problem-list-item, coded in SNOMED. The 10 encounter-diagnosis conditions are "part of" the chronic problem-list-item.

B) A patient has Type II Diabetes, which is a chronic Condition with category of problem-list-item. Due to the diabetes, the patient gets a foot exam, which results in a visit-specific Condition (e.g. E11.621 Type 2 diabetes mellitus with foot ulcer) with category = encounter-diagnosis, coded with an ICD-10 CM code. The E11.621 Type 2 diabetes mellitus with foot ulcer encounter-diagnosis condition is "part of" the chronic type II diabetes problem-list-item.

Our goal is to make it easier for applications to visually replicate our condition list. We dislike using terminology (solely) to do this due to the multiple code systems at play with differing levels of specificity (ICD-10 for diagnosis, SNOMED for problems - missing laterality, IMO for physician-friendly searches/displays, etc.), so we were wanting to use the condition-partOf extension to effectively group together related condition instances (diagnosis + problems). In all transparency, we debated using Linkage, but there are gaps there as well.