Uploaded image for project: 'FHIR Specification Feedback'
  1. FHIR Specification Feedback
  2. FHIR-34677

costToBeneficiary type bound differently in profile and extension

    XMLWordPrintableJSON

Details

    • Icon: Change Request Change Request
    • Resolution: Persuasive
    • Icon: Highest Highest
    • US CARIN Digital Insurance Card (DIC) (FHIR)
    • 0.1.0
    • Payer/Provider Information Exchange
    • Beneficiary Costs [deprecated]
      C4DIC Coverage
    • Hide

      We have met twice with the public CARIN DICard working session (most recently 1/27) and agree that they should be consistent. We have aligned to update the binding to be extensible in the event that insurers need to represent concepts that have not been outlined in the C4DIC ValueSet.

      Show
      We have met twice with the public CARIN DICard working session (most recently 1/27) and agree that they should be consistent. We have aligned to update the binding to be extensible in the event that insurers need to represent concepts that have not been outlined in the C4DIC ValueSet.
    • Mark Roberts/Durwin Day: 12-0-3
    • Correction
    • Compatible, substantive

    Description

      In the Coverage profile, Coverage.costToBeneficiary.type has an extensible binding to hte C4DIC Copay Type value set, but in the costToBeneficiary extension, the type element has a required binding to the same value set. It seems that these should be the same binding strengths, otherwise a string value cannot be used for any extended copay types used by the base data element.

      Attachments

        Activity

          People

            Unassigned Unassigned
            craig.newman Craig Newman
            Watchers:
            1 Start watching this issue

            Dates

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: