Generated Narrative: CodeSystem v3-ObservationValue

Language: en

Properties

This code system defines the following properties for its concepts

Name	Code	URI	Type	Description
Specializes	Specializes		Coding	The child code is a more narrow version of the concept represented by the parent code. I.e. Every child concept is also a valid parent concept. Used to allow determination of subsumption. Must be transitive, irreflexive, antisymmetric.
Generalizes	Generalizes		Coding	Inverse of Specializes. Only included as a derived relationship.
internalId	internalId	http://terminology.hl7.org/CodeSystem/utg-concept-properties#v3-internal-id	code	The internal identifier for the concept in the HL7 Access database repository.
Status	status	http://hl7.org/fhir/concept-properties#status	code	A property that indicates the status of the concept. One of active, experimental, deprecated, or retired.
Deprecation Date	deprecationDate	http://hl7.org/fhir/concept-properties#deprecationDate	dateTime	The date at which a concept was deprecated. Concepts that are deprecated but not inactive can still be used, but their use is discouraged.
Not Selectable	notSelectable	http://hl7.org/fhir/concept-properties#notSelectable	boolean	Indicates that the code is abstract - only intended to be used as a selector for other concepts

Concepts

This case-insensitive code system http://terminology.hl7.org/CodeSystem/v3-ObservationValue defines the following codes in a Is-A hierarchy:

Lvl	Code	Display	Definition	Deprecated	internalId	Status	Deprecation Date	Not Selectable
1	_ActCoverageAssessmentObservationValue	ActCoverageAssessmentObservationValue	Codes specify the category of observation, evidence, or document used to assess for services, e.g., discharge planning, or to establish eligibility for coverage under a policy or program. The type of evidence is coded as observation values. \n		22268	active		true
2	_ActFinancialStatusObservationValue	ActFinancialStatusObservationValue	Code specifying financial indicators used to assess or establish eligibility for coverage under a policy or program; e.g., pay stub; tax or income document; asset document; living expenses. \n		22306	active		true
3	ASSET	asset	Codes specifying asset indicators used to assess or establish eligibility for coverage under a policy or program. \n		22316	active
4	ANNUITY	annuity	Indicator of annuity ownership or status as beneficiary. \n		22320	active
4	PROP	real property	Indicator of real property ownership, e.g., deed or real estate contract. \n		22317	active
4	RETACCT	retirement investment account	Indicator of retirement investment account ownership. \n		22318	active
4	TRUST	trust	Indicator of status as trust beneficiary. \n		22319	active
3	INCOME	income	Code specifying income indicators used to assess or establish eligibility for coverage under a policy or program; e.g., pay or pension check, child support payments received or provided, and taxes paid. \n		22307	active
4	CHILD	child support	Indicator of child support payments received or provided. \n		22311	active
4	DISABL	disability pay	Indicator of disability income replacement payment. \n		22314	active
4	INVEST	investment income	Indicator of investment income, e.g., dividend check, annuity payment; real estate rent, investment divestiture proceeds; trust or endowment check. \n		22310	active
4	PAY	paid employment	Indicator of paid employment, e.g., letter of hire, contract, employer letter; copy of pay check or pay stub. \n		22308	active
4	RETIRE	retirement pay	Indicator of retirement payment, e.g., pension check. \n		22309	active
4	SPOUSAL	spousal or partner support	Indicator of spousal or partner support payments received or provided; e.g., alimony payment; support stipulations in a divorce settlement. \n		22312	active
4	SUPPLE	income supplement	Indicator of income supplement, e.g., gifting, parental income support; stipend, or grant. \n		22313	active
4	TAX	tax obligation	Indicator of tax obligation or payment, e.g., statement of taxable income. \n		22315	active
3	LIVEXP	living expense	Codes specifying living expense indicators used to assess or establish eligibility for coverage under a policy or program. \n		22321	active
4	CLOTH	clothing expense	Indicator of clothing expenses. \n		22327	active
4	FOOD	food expense	Indicator of transportation expenses. \n		22329	active
4	HEALTH	health expense	Indicator of health expenses; including medication costs, health service costs, financial participations, and health coverage premiums. \n		22326	active
4	HOUSE	household expense	Indicator of housing expense, e.g., household appliances, fixtures, furnishings, and maintenance and repairs. \n		22324	active
4	LEGAL	legal expense	Indicator of legal expenses. \n		22328	active
4	MORTG	mortgage	Indicator of mortgage amount, interest, and payments. \n		22323	active
4	RENT	rent	Indicator of rental or lease payments. \n		22322	active
4	SUNDRY	sundry expense	Indicator of transportation expenses. \n		22330	active
4	TRANS	transportation expense	Indicator of transportation expenses, e.g., vehicle payments, vehicle insurance, vehicle fuel, and vehicle maintenance and repairs. \n		22325	active
4	UTIL	utility expense	Indicator of transportation expenses. \n		22331	active
2	ELSTAT	eligibility indicator	Code specifying eligibility indicators used to assess or establish eligibility for coverage under a policy or program eligibility status, e.g., certificates of creditable coverage; student enrollment; adoption, marriage or birth certificate. \n		22295	active
3	ADOPT	adoption document	Indicator of adoption. \n		22304	active
3	BTHCERT	birth certificate	Indicator of birth. \n		22303	active
3	CCOC	creditable coverage document	Indicator of creditable coverage. \n		22299	active
3	DRLIC	driver license	Indicator of driving status. \n		22301	active
3	FOSTER	foster child document	Indicator of foster child status. \n		22305	active
3	MEMBER	program or policy member	Indicator of status as covered member under a policy or program, e.g., member id card or coverage document. \n		22296	active
3	MIL	military identification	Indicator of military status. \n		22302	active
3	MRGCERT	marriage certificate	Indicator of marriage status. \n		22300	active
3	PASSPORT	passport	Indicator of citizenship. \n		22297	active
3	STUDENRL	student enrollment	Indicator of student status. \n		22298	active
2	HLSTAT	health status	Code specifying non-clinical indicators related to health status used to assess or establish eligibility for coverage under a policy or program, e.g., pregnancy, disability, drug use, mental health issues. \n		22290	active
3	DISABLE	disabled	Indication of disability. \n		22293	active
3	DRUG	drug use	Indication of drug use. \n		22294	active
3	IVDRG	IV drug use	Indication of IV drug use . \n		22292	active
3	PGNT	pregnant	Non-clinical report of pregnancy. \n		22291	active
2	LIVDEP	living dependency	Code specifying observations related to living dependency, such as dependent upon spouse for activities of daily living. \n		22286	active
3	RELDEP	relative dependent	Continued living in private residence requires functional and health care assistance from one or more relatives. \n		22288	active
3	SPSDEP	spouse dependent	Continued living in private residence requires functional and health care assistance from spouse or life partner. \n		22287	active
3	URELDEP	unrelated person dependent	Continued living in private residence requires functional and health care assistance from one or more unrelated persons. \n		22289	active
2	LIVSIT	living situation	Code specifying observations related to living situation for a person in a private residence. \n		22277	active
3	ALONE	alone	Living alone. Maps to PD1-2 Living arrangement (IS) 00742 [A] \n		22281	active
3	DEPCHD	dependent children	Living with one or more dependent children requiring moderate supervision. \n		22278	active
3	DEPSPS	dependent spouse	Living with disabled spouse requiring functional and health care assistance \n		22280	active
3	DEPYGCHD	dependent young children	Living with one or more dependent children requiring intensive supervision \n		22279	active
3	FAM	live with family	Living with family. Maps to PD1-2 Living arrangement (IS) 00742 [F] \n		22284	active
3	RELAT	relative	Living with one or more relatives. Maps to PD1-2 Living arrangement (IS) 00742 [R] \n		22283	active
3	SPS	spouse only	Living only with spouse or life partner. Maps to PD1-2 Living arrangement (IS) 00742 [S] \n		22282	active
3	UNREL	unrelated person	Living with one or more unrelated persons. \n		22285	active
2	SOECSTAT	socio economic status	Code specifying observations or indicators related to socio-economic status used to assess to assess for services, e.g., discharge planning, or to establish eligibility for coverage under a policy or program. \n		22269	active
3	ABUSE	abuse victim	Indication of abuse victim. \n		22275	active
3	HMLESS	homeless	Indication of status as homeless. \n		22270	active
3	ILGIM	illegal immigrant	Indication of status as illegal immigrant. \n		22271	active
3	INCAR	incarcerated	Indication of status as incarcerated. \n		22272	active
3	PROB	probation	Indication of probation status. \n		22273	active
3	REFUG	refugee	Indication of refugee status. \n		22276	active
3	UNEMPL	unemployed	Indication of unemployed status. \n		22274	active
1	_AllergyTestValue	AllergyTestValue	Indicates the result of a particular allergy test. E.g. Negative, Mild, Moderate, Severe \n		21496	active		true
2	A0	no reaction	Description:Patient exhibits no reaction to the challenge agent. \n		22816	active
2	A1	minimal reaction	Description:Patient exhibits a minimal reaction to the challenge agent. \n		22817	active
2	A2	mild reaction	Description:Patient exhibits a mild reaction to the challenge agent. \n		22818	active
2	A3	moderate reaction	Description:Patient exhibits moderate reaction to the challenge agent. \n		22819	active
2	A4	severe reaction	Description:Patient exhibits a severe reaction to the challenge agent. \n		22820	active
1	_CompositeMeasureScoring	CompositeMeasureScoring	Observation values that communicate the method used in a quality measure to combine the component measure results included in an composite measure. \n		23783	active		true
2	ALLORNONESCR	All-or-nothing Scoring	Code specifying that the measure uses all-or-nothing scoring. All-or-nothing scoring places an individual in the numerator of the composite measure if and only if they are in the numerator of all component measures in which they are in the denominator. \n		23784	active
2	LINEARSCR	Linear Scoring	Code specifying that the measure uses linear scoring. Linear scoring computes the fraction of component measures in which the individual appears in the numerator, giving equal weight to each component measure. \n		23785	active
2	OPPORSCR	Opportunity Scoring	Code specifying that the measure uses opportunity-based scoring. In opportunity-based scoring the measure score is determined by combining the denominator and numerator of each component measure to determine an overall composite score. \n		23786	active
2	WEIGHTSCR	Weighted Scoring	Code specifying that the measure uses weighted scoring. Weighted scoring assigns a factor to each component measure to weight that measure's contribution to the overall score. \n		23787	active
1	_CoverageLimitObservationValue	CoverageLimitObservationValue	Description:Coded observation values for coverage limitations, for e.g., types of claims or types of parties covered under a policy or program. \n		22627	active		true
2	_CoverageLevelObservationValue	CoverageLevelObservationValue	Description:Coded observation values for types of covered parties under a policy or program based on their personal relationships or employment status. \n		22630	active		true
3	ADC	adult child	Description:Child over an age as specified by coverage policy or program, e.g., student, differently abled, and income dependent. \n		22631	active
3	CHD	child	Description:Dependent biological, adopted, foster child as specified by coverage policy or program. \n		22632	active
3	DEP	dependent	Description:Person requiring functional and/or financial assistance from another person as specified by coverage policy or program. \n		22633	active
3	DP	domestic partner	Description:Persons registered as a family unit in a domestic partner registry as specified by law and by coverage policy or program. \n		22634	active
3	ECH	employee	Description:An individual employed by an employer who receive remuneration in wages, salary, commission, tips, piece-rates, or pay-in-kind through the employeraTMs payment system (i.e., not a contractor) as specified by coverage policy or program. \n		22635	active
3	FLY	family coverage	Description:As specified by coverage policy or program. \n		22636	active
3	IND	individual	Description:Person as specified by coverage policy or program. \n		22637	active
3	SSP	same sex partner	Description:A pair of people of the same gender who live together as a family as specified by coverage policy or program, e.g., Naomi and Ruth from the Book of Ruth; Socrates and Alcibiades \n		22638	active
2	_CoverageItemLimitObservationValue	CoverageItemLimitObservationValue	Description:Coded observation values for types or instances of items for which coverage is provided under a policy or program, e.g., a type of vehicle or a named work of art. \n		22629	retired		true
2	_CoverageLocationLimitObservationValue	CoverageLocationLimitObservationValue	Description:Coded observation values for types or instances of locations for which coverage is provided under a policy or program, e.g., in the covered party home, in state or in the country. \n		22628	retired		true
1	_CriticalityObservationValue	CriticalityObservationValue	A clinical judgment as to the worst case result of a future exposure (including substance administration). When the worst case result is assessed to have a life-threatening or organ system threatening potential, it is considered to be of high criticality. \n		23726	active		true
2	CRITH	high criticality	Worst case result of a future exposure is assessed to be life-threatening or having high potential for organ system failure. \n		23727	active
2	CRITL	low criticality	Worst case result of a future exposure is not assessed to be life-threatening or having high potential for organ system failure. \n		23728	active
2	CRITU	unable to assess criticality	Unable to assess the worst case result of a future exposure. \n		23729	active
1	_EmploymentStatus	_EmploymentStatus	Concepts representing whether a person does or does not currently have a job or is not currently in the labor pool seeking employment. \n		23919	active		true
2	Employed	Employed	Individuals who, during the last week: a) did any work for at least 1 hour as paid or unpaid employees of a business or government organization; worked in their own businesses, professions, or on their own farms; or b) were not working, but who have a job or business from which the individual was temporarily absent because of vacation, illness, bad weather, childcare problems, maternity or paternity leave, labor-management dispute, job training, or other family or personal reasons, regardless of whether or not they were paid for the time off or were seeking other jobs. \n		23920	active
2	NotInLaborForce	Not In Labor Force	Persons not classified as employed or unemployed, meaning those who have no job and are not looking for one. \n		23922	active
2	Unemployed	Unemployed	Persons who currently have no employment, but are available for work and have made specific efforts to find employment. \n		23921	active
1	_GeneticObservationValue	GeneticObservationValue	Description: The domain contains genetic analysis specific observation values, e.g. Homozygote, Heterozygote, etc. \n		22648	active		true
2	Homozygote	HOMO	Description: An individual having different alleles at one or more loci regarding a specific character \n		22649	active
1	_MeasurementImprovementNotation	Measurement Improvement Notation	Observation values that indicate what change in a measurement value or score is indicative of an improvement in the measured item or scored issue. \n		24042	active		true
2	DecrIsImp	Decreased score indicates improvement	Improvement is indicated as a decrease in the score or measurement (e.g. Lower score indicates better quality) \n		24044	active
2	IncrIsImp	Increased score indicates improvement	Improvement is indicated as an increase in the score or measurement (e.g. Higher score indicates better quality) \n		24043	active
1	_ObservationMeasureScoring	ObservationMeasureScoring	Observation values used to indicate the type of scoring (e.g. proportion, ratio) used by a health quality measure. \n		23037	active		true
2	COHORT	cohort measure scoring	A measure in which either short-term cross-section or long-term longitudinal analysis is performed over a group of subjects defined by a set of common properties or defining characteristics (e.g., Male smokers between the ages of 40 and 50 years, exposure to treatment, exposure duration). \n		23553	active
2	CONTVAR	continuous variable measure scoring	A measure score in which each individual value for the measure can fall anywhere along a continuous scale (e.g., mean time to thrombolytics which aggregates the time in minutes from a case presenting with chest pain to the time of administration of thrombolytics). \n		23038	active
2	PROPOR	proportion measure scoring	A score derived by dividing the number of cases that meet a criterion for quality (the numerator) by the number of eligible cases within a given time frame (the denominator) where the numerator cases are a subset of the denominator cases (e.g., percentage of eligible women with a mammogram performed in the last year). \n		23039	active
2	RATIO	ratio measure scoring	A score that may have a value of zero or greater that is derived by dividing a count of one type of data by a count of another type of data (e.g., the number of patients with central lines who develop infection divided by the number of central line days). \n		23040	active
1	_ObservationMeasureType	ObservationMeasureType	Observation values used to indicate what kind of health quality measure is used. \n		23041	active		true
2	COMPOSITE	composite measure type	A measure that is composed from one or more other measures and indicates an overall summary of those measures. \n		23650	active
2	EFFICIENCY	efficiency measure type	A measure related to the efficiency of medical treatment. \n		23652	active
2	EXPERIENCE	experience measure type	A measure related to the level of patient engagement or patient experience of care. \n		23653	active
2	OUTCOME	outcome measure type	A measure that indicates the result of the performance (or non-performance) of a function or process. \n		23042	active
3	INTERM-OM	intermediate outcome measure type	A measure that evaluates the change over time of a physiologic state observable that is associated with a specific long-term health outcome. \n		23862	active
3	PRO-PM	patient reported outcome measure type	A measure that is a comparison of patient reported outcomes for a single or multiple patients collected via an instrument specifically designed to obtain input directly from patients. \n		23861	active
2	PROCESS	process measure type	A measure which focuses on a process which leads to a certain outcome, meaning that a scientific basis exists for believing that the process, when executed well, will increase the probability of achieving a desired outcome. \n		23043	active
3	APPROPRIATE	appropriate use process measure	A measure that assesses the use of one or more processes where the expected health benefit exceeds the expected negative consequences. \n		23863	active
2	RESOURCE	resource use measure type	A measure related to the extent of use of clinical resources or cost of care. \n		23651	active
2	STRUCTURE	structure measure type	A measure related to the structure of patient care. \n		23654	active
1	_ObservationPopulationInclusion	ObservationPopulationInclusion	Observation values used to assert various populations that a subject falls into. \n	Deprecated	23044	deprecated	2013-07-26
2	DENEX	denominator exclusions	Patients who should be removed from the eMeasure population and denominator before determining if numerator criteria are met. Denominator exclusions are used in proportion and ratio measures to help narrow the denominator. \n	Deprecated	23442	deprecated	2013-07-26
2	DENEXCEP	denominator exceptions	Denominator exceptions are those conditions that should remove a patient, procedure or unit of measurement from the denominator only if the numerator criteria are not met. Denominator exceptions allow for adjustment of the calculated score for those providers with higher risk populations. Denominator exceptions are used only in proportion eMeasures. They are not appropriate for ratio or continuous variable eMeasures. Denominator exceptions allow for the exercise of clinical judgment and should be specifically defined where capturing the information in a structured manner fits the clinical workflow. Generic denominator exception reasons used in proportion eMeasures fall into three general categories: \n \n Medical reasons \n Patient reasons \n System reasons \n \n	Deprecated	23046	deprecated	2013-07-26
2	DENOM	denominator	It can be the same as the initial patient population or a subset of the initial patient population to further constrain the population for the purpose of the eMeasure. Different measures within an eMeasure set may have different Denominators. Continuous Variable eMeasures do not have a Denominator, but instead define a Measure Population. \n	Deprecated	23045	deprecated	2013-07-26
2	IP	initial population	The initial population refers to all entities to be evaluated by a specific quality measure who share a common set of specified characteristics within a specific measurement set to which a given measure belongs. \n	Deprecated	23528	deprecated	2013-07-26
3	IPP	initial patient population	The initial patient population refers to all patients to be evaluated by a specific quality measure who share a common set of specified characteristics within a specific measurement set to which a given measure belongs. Details often include information based upon specific age groups, diagnoses, diagnostic and procedure codes, and enrollment periods. \n	Deprecated	23047	deprecated	2013-07-26
2	MSRPOPL	measure population	Measure population is used only in continuous variable eMeasures. It is a narrative description of the eMeasure population. (e.g., all patients seen in the Emergency Department during the measurement period). \n	Deprecated	23048	deprecated	2013-07-26
2	NUMER	numerator	Numerators are used in proportion and ratio eMeasures. In proportion measures the numerator criteria are the processes or outcomes expected for each patient, procedure, or other unit of measurement defined in the denominator. In ratio measures the numerator is related, but not directly derived from the denominator (e.g., a numerator listing the number of central line blood stream infections and a denominator indicating the days per thousand of central line usage in a specific time period). \n	Deprecated	23049	deprecated	2013-07-26
2	NUMEX	numerator exclusions	Numerator Exclusions are used only in ratio eMeasures to define instances that should not be included in the numerator data. (e.g., if the number of central line blood stream infections per 1000 catheter days were to exclude infections with a specific bacterium, that bacterium would be listed as a numerator exclusion.) \n	Deprecated	23443	deprecated	2013-07-26
1	_PartialCompletionScale	PartialCompletionScale			21099	active		true
2	G	Great extent	Value for Act.partialCompletionCode attribute that implies 81-99% completion \n		18126	active
2	LE	Large extent	Value for Act.partialCompletionCode attribute that implies 61-80% completion \n		18125	active
2	ME	Medium extent	Value for Act.partialCompletionCode attribute that implies 41-60% completion \n		18124	active
2	MI	Minimal extent	Value for Act.partialCompletionCode attribute that implies 1-20% completion \n		18122	active
2	N	None	Value for Act.partialCompletionCode attribute that implies 0% completion \n		18121	active
2	S	Some extent	Value for Act.partialCompletionCode attribute that implies 21-40% completion \n		18123	active
1	_SecurityObservationValue	SecurityObservationValue	Observation values used to indicate security observation metadata. \n		23483	active		true
2	_SECCATOBV	security category	Abstract security observation values used to indicate security category metadata. \n Examples: Codes conveying: \n \n privacy law \n information sensitivity \n consent directive types \n \n		23485	active		true
2	_SECCLASSOBV	security classification	Abstract security observation values used to indicate security classification metadata. \n Examples: Confidentiality Codes \n		23484	active		true
2	_SECCONOBV	security control	Abstract security observation values used to indicate security control metadata. \n Examples: Codes conveying dissemination controls, information handling caveats, purpose of use, refrain policies, and obligations to which custodians and information receivers must comply. \n		23486	active		true
2	_SECINTOBV	security integrity	Abstract security observation values used to indicate security integrity metadata. \n Examples: Codes conveying integrity status, integrity confidence, and provenance. \n		23487	active		true
3	_SECALTINTOBV	alteration integrity	Abstract security metadata observation values used to indicate mechanism used for authorized alteration of an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability) \n		23497	active		true
4	ABSTRED	abstracted	Security metadata observation values used to indicate the use of a more abstract version of the content, e.g., replacing exact value of an age or date field with a range, or remove the left digits of a credit card number or SSN. \n		23498	active
4	AGGRED	aggregated	Security metadata observation values used to indicate the use of an algorithmic combination of actual values with the result of an aggregate function, e.g., average, sum, or count in order to limit disclosure of an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability) to the minimum necessary. \n		23499	active
4	ANONYED	anonymized	Security metadata observation value conveying the alteration integrity of an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability) by used to indicate the mechanism by which software systems can strip portions of the resource that could allow the identification of the source of the information or the information subject. No key to relink the data is retained. \n		23500	active
4	MAPPED	mapped	Security metadata observation value used to indicate that the IT resource semantic content has been transformed from one encoding to another. \n Usage Note: "MAP" code does not indicate the semantic fidelity of the transformed content. \n To indicate semantic fidelity for maps of HL7 to other code systems, this security alteration integrity observation may be further specified using an Act valued with Value Set: MapRelationship (2.16.840.1.113883.1.11.11052). \n Semantic fidelity of the mapped IT Resource may also be indicated using a SecurityIntegrityConfidenceObservation. \n		23501	active
4	MASKED	masked	Security metadata observation value conveying the alteration integrity of an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability) by indicating the mechanism by which software systems can make data unintelligible (that is, as unreadable and unusable by algorithmically transforming plaintext into ciphertext) such that it can only be accessed or used by authorized users. An authorized user may be provided a key to decrypt per license or "shared secret". \n Usage Note: "MASKED" may be used, per applicable policy, as a flag to indicate to a user or receiver that some portion of an IT resource has been further encrypted, and may be accessed only by an authorized user or receiver to which a decryption key is provided. \n		23502	active
4	PSEUDED	pseudonymized	Security metadata observation value conveying the alteration integrity of an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability), by indicating the mechanism by which software systems can strip portions of the resource that could allow the identification of the source of the information or the information subject. Custodian may retain a key to relink data necessary to reidentify the information subject. \n Rationale: Personal data which has been processed to make it impossible to know whose data it is. Used particularly for secondary use of health data. In some cases, it may be possible for authorized individuals to restore the identity of the individual, e.g.,for public health case management. Based on ISO/TS 25237:2008 Health informatics-Pseudonymization \n		23503	active
4	REDACTED	redacted	Security metadata observation value used to indicate the mechanism by which software systems can filter an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability) to remove any portion of the resource that is not authorized to be access, used, or disclosed. \n Usage Note: "REDACTED" may be used, per applicable policy, as a flag to indicate to a user or receiver that some portion of an IT resource has filtered and not included in the content accessed or received. \n		23504	active
4	SUBSETTED	subsetted	Metadata observation used to indicate that some information has been removed from the source object when the view this object contains was constructed because of configuration options when the view was created. The content may not be suitable for use as the basis of a record update \n Usage Note: This is not suitable to be used when information is removed for security reasons - see the code REDACTED for this use. \n		23730	active
4	SYNTAC	syntactic transform	Security metadata observation value used to indicate that the IT resource syntax has been transformed from one syntactical representation to another. \n Usage Note: "SYNTAC" code does not indicate the syntactical correctness of the syntactically transformed IT resource. \n		23505	active
4	TRSLT	translated	Security metadata observation value used to indicate that the IT resource has been translated from one human language to another. \n Usage Note: "TRSLT" does not indicate the fidelity of the translation or the languages translated. \n The fidelity of the IT Resource translation may be indicated using a SecurityIntegrityConfidenceObservation. \n To indicate languages, use the Value Set:HumanLanguage (2.16.840.1.113883.1.11.11526) \n		23506	active
4	VERSIONED	versioned	Security metadata observation value conveying the alteration integrity of an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability) which indicates that the resource only retains versions of an IT resource for access and use per applicable policy \n Usage Note: When this code is used, expectation is that the system has removed historical versions of the data that falls outside the time period deemed to be the effective time of the applicable version. \n		23507	active
3	_SECDATINTOBV	data integrity	Abstract security observation values used to indicate data integrity metadata. \n Examples: Codes conveying the mechanism used to preserve the accuracy and consistency of an IT resource such as a digital signature and a cryptographic hash function. \n		23494	active		true
4	CRYTOHASH	cryptographic hash function	Security metadata observation value used to indicate the mechanism by which software systems can establish that data was not modified in transit. \n Rationale: This definition is intended to align with the ISO 22600-2 3.3.19 definition of cryptographic checkvalue: Information which is derived by performing a cryptographic transformation (see cryptography) on the data unit. The derivation of the checkvalue may be performed in one or more steps and is a result of a mathematical function of the key and a data unit. It is usually used to check the integrity of a data unit. \n Examples: \n \n SHA-1 \n SHA-2 (Secure Hash Algorithm) \n \n		23495	active
4	DIGSIG	digital signature	Security metadata observation value used to indicate the mechanism by which software systems use digital signature to establish that data has not been modified. \n Rationale: This definition is intended to align with the ISO 22600-2 3.3.26 definition of digital signature: Data appended to, or a cryptographic transformation (see cryptography) of, a data unit that allows a recipient of the data unit to prove the source and integrity of the data unit and protect against forgery e.g., by the recipient. \n		23496	active
3	_SECINTCONOBV	integrity confidence	Abstract security observation value used to indicate integrity confidence metadata. \n Examples: Codes conveying the level of reliability and trustworthiness of an IT resource. \n		23489	active		true
4	HRELIABLE	highly reliable	Security metadata observation value used to indicate that the veracity or trustworthiness of an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability) for a specified purpose of use is perceived to be or deemed by policy to be very high. \n		23490	active
4	RELIABLE	reliable	Security metadata observation value used to indicate that the veracity or trustworthiness of an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability) for a specified purpose of use is perceived to be or deemed by policy to be adequate. \n		23491	active
4	UNCERTREL	uncertain reliability	Security metadata observation value used to indicate that the veracity or trustworthiness of an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability) for a specified purpose of use is perceived to be or deemed by policy to be uncertain. \n		23492	active
4	UNRELIABLE	unreliable	Security metadata observation value used to indicate that the veracity or trustworthiness of an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability) for a specified purpose of use is perceived to be or deemed by policy to be inadequate. \n		23493	active
3	_SECINTPRVOBV	provenance	Abstract security metadata observation value used to indicate the provenance of an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability). \n Examples: Codes conveying the provenance metadata about the entity reporting an IT resource. \n		23508	active		true
4	_SECINTPRVABOBV	provenance asserted by	Abstract security provenance metadata observation value used to indicate the entity that asserted an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability). \n Examples: Codes conveying the provenance metadata about the entity asserting the resource. \n		23518	active		true
5	CLINAST	clinician asserted	Security provenance metadata observation value used to indicate that an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability) was asserted by a clinician. \n		23519	active
5	DEVAST	device asserted	Security provenance metadata observation value used to indicate that an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability) was asserted by a device. \n		23523	active
5	HCPAST	healthcare professional asserted	Security provenance metadata observation value used to indicate that an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability) was asserted by a healthcare professional. \n		23520	active
5	PACQAST	patient acquaintance asserted	Security provenance metadata observation value used to indicate that an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability) was asserted by a patient acquaintance. \n		23526	active
5	PATAST	patient asserted	Security provenance metadata observation value used to indicate that an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability) was asserted by a patient. \n		23524	active
5	PAYAST	payer asserted	Security provenance metadata observation value used to indicate that an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability) was asserted by a payer. \n		23522	active
5	PROAST	professional asserted	Security provenance metadata observation value used to indicate that an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability) was asserted by a professional. \n		23521	active
5	SDMAST	substitute decision maker asserted	Security provenance metadata observation value used to indicate that an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability) was asserted by a substitute decision maker. \n		23525	active
5	AIAST	Artificial Intelligence asserted	Security provenance metadata observation value used to indicate that an IT resource (data, or information object) was asserted by a Artificial Intelligence (e.g. Clinical Decision Support, Machine Learning, Algorithm). \n		123525	active
5	DICTAST	Dictation asserted	Security provenance metadata observation value used to indicate that an IT resource (data, or information object) was asserted by a Dictation algorithm transforming human communications (e.g. speech). \n		223525	active
4	_SECINTPRVRBOBV	provenance reported by	Abstract security provenance metadata observation value used to indicate the entity that reported the resource (data, information object, service, or system capability). \n Examples: Codes conveying the provenance metadata about the entity reporting an IT resource. \n		23509	active		true
5	CLINRPT	clinician reported	Security provenance metadata observation value used to indicate that an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability) was reported by a clinician. \n		23510	active
5	DEVRPT	device reported	Security provenance metadata observation value used to indicate that an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability) was reported by a device. \n		23514	active
5	HCPRPT	healthcare professional reported	Security provenance metadata observation value used to indicate that an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability) was reported by a healthcare professional. \n		23511	active
5	PACQRPT	patient acquaintance reported	Security provenance metadata observation value used to indicate that an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability) was reported by a patient acquaintance. \n		23517	active
5	PATRPT	patient reported	Security provenance metadata observation value used to indicate that an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability) was reported by a patient. \n		23515	active
5	PAYRPT	payer reported	Security provenance metadata observation value used to indicate that an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability) was reported by a payer. \n		23513	active
5	PRORPT	professional reported	Security provenance metadata observation value used to indicate that an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability) was reported by a professional. \n		23512	active
5	SDMRPT	substitute decision maker reported	Security provenance metadata observation value used to indicate that an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability) was reported by a substitute decision maker. \n		23516	active
3	_SECINTSTOBV	integrity status	Abstract security observation values used to indicate integrity status metadata. \n Examples: Codes, such as those in the HL7 DocumentClassification code system conveying the workflow status of resource as authenticated, legally authenticated, and in progress. \n		23488	active		true
2	SECTRSTOBV	security trust observation	Observation value used to indicate aspects of trust applicable to an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability). \n		23672	active		true
3	TRSTACCRDOBV	trust accreditation observation	Values for security trust accreditation metadata observation made about the formal declaration by an authority or neutral third party that validates the technical, security, trust, and business practice conformance of Trust Agents to facilitate security, interoperability, and trust among participants within a security domain or trust framework. \n		23673	active
3	TRSTAGREOBV	trust agreement observation	Values for security trust agreement metadata observation made about privacy and security requirements with which a security domain must comply. [ISO IEC 10181-1] [ISO IEC 10181-1] \n		23674	active
3	TRSTCERTOBV	trust certificate observation	Values for security trust certificate metadata observation made about a set of security-relevant data issued by a security authority or trusted third party, together with security information which is used to provide the integrity and data origin authentication services for an IT resource (data, information object, service, or system capability). [Based on ISO IEC 10181-1] \n For example, a Certificate Policy (CP), which is a named set of rules that indicates the applicability of a certificate to a particular community and/or class of application with common security requirements. A particular Certificate Policy might indicate the applicability of a type of certificate to the authentication of electronic data interchange transactions for the trading of goods within a given price range. Another example is Cross Certification with Federal Bridge. \n		23675	active
3	TRSTFWKOBV	none supplied 5	Values for security trust framework metadata observation made about a complete set of contracts, regulations or commitments that enable participating actors to rely on certain assertions by other actors to fulfill their information security requirements. [Kantara Initiative] \n		23717	active		true
3	TRSTLOAOBV	trust assurance observation	Values for security trust assurance metadata observation made about the digital quality or reliability of a trust assertion, activity, capability, information exchange, mechanism, process, or protocol. \n		23676	active		true
4	LOAAN	authentication level of assurance value	The value assigned as the indicator of the digital quality or reliability of the verification and validation process used to verify the claimed identity of an entity by securely associating an identifier and its authenticator. [Based on ISO 7498-2] \n For example, the degree of confidence in the vetting process used to establish the identity of the individual to whom the credential was issued, and 2) the degree of confidence that the individual who uses the credential is the individual to whom the credential was issued. [OMB M-04-04 E-Authentication Guidance for Federal Agencies] \n		23677	active		true
5	LOAAN1	low authentication level of assurance	Indicator of low digital quality or reliability of the digital reliability of the verification and validation process used to verify the claimed identity of an entity by securely associating an identifier and its authenticator. [Based on ISO 7498-2] \n The degree of confidence in the vetting process used to establish the identity of the individual to whom the credential was issued, and 2) the degree of confidence that the individual who uses the credential is the individual to whom the credential was issued. [OMB M-04-04 E-Authentication Guidance for Federal Agencies] \n Low authentication level of assurance indicates that the relying party may have little or no confidence in the asserted identity's validity. Level 1 requires little or no confidence in the asserted identity. No identity proofing is required at this level, but the authentication mechanism should provide some assurance that the same claimant is accessing the protected transaction or data. A wide range of available authentication technologies can be employed and any of the token methods of Levels 2, 3, or 4, including Personal Identification Numbers (PINs), may be used. To be authenticated, the claimant must prove control of the token through a secure authentication protocol. At Level 1, long-term shared authentication secrets may be revealed to verifiers. Assertions issued about claimants as a result of a successful authentication are either cryptographically authenticated by relying parties (using approved methods) or are obtained directly from a trusted party via a secure authentication protocol. [Summary of the technical requirements specified in NIST SP 800-63 for the four levels of assurance defined by the December 2003, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued Memorandum M-04-04, E-Authentication Guidance for Federal Agencies.] \n		23678	active
5	LOAAN2	basic authentication level of assurance	Indicator of basic digital quality or reliability of the digital reliability of the verification and validation process used to verify the claimed identity of an entity by securely associating an identifier and its authenticator. [Based on ISO 7498-2] \n The degree of confidence in the vetting process used to establish the identity of the individual to whom the credential was issued, and 2) the degree of confidence that the individual who uses the credential is the individual to whom the credential was issued. [OMB M-04-04 E-Authentication Guidance for Federal Agencies] \n Basic authentication level of assurance indicates that the relying party may have some confidence in the asserted identity's validity. Level 2 requires confidence that the asserted identity is accurate. Level 2 provides for single-factor remote network authentication, including identity-proofing requirements for presentation of identifying materials or information. A wide range of available authentication technologies can be employed, including any of the token methods of Levels 3 or 4, as well as passwords. Successful authentication requires that the claimant prove through a secure authentication protocol that the claimant controls the token. Eavesdropper, replay, and online guessing attacks are prevented. Long-term shared authentication secrets, if used, are never revealed to any party except the claimant and verifiers operated by the CSP; however, session (temporary) shared secrets may be provided to independent verifiers by the CSP. Approved cryptographic techniques are required. Assertions issued about claimants as a result of a successful authentication are either cryptographically authenticated by relying parties (using approved methods) or are obtained directly from a trusted party via a secure authentication protocol. [Summary of the technical requirements specified in NIST SP 800-63 for the four levels of assurance defined by the December 2003, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued Memorandum M-04-04, E-Authentication Guidance for Federal Agencies.] \n		23679	active
5	LOAAN3	medium authentication level of assurance	Indicator of medium digital quality or reliability of the digital reliability of verification and validation of the process used to verify the claimed identity of an entity by securely associating an identifier and its authenticator. [Based on ISO 7498-2] \n The degree of confidence in the vetting process used to establish the identity of the individual to whom the credential was issued, and 2) the degree of confidence that the individual who uses the credential is the individual to whom the credential was issued. [OMB M-04-04 E-Authentication Guidance for Federal Agencies] \n Medium authentication level of assurance indicates that the relying party may have high confidence in the asserted identity's validity. Level 3 is appropriate for transactions that need high confidence in the accuracy of the asserted identity. Level 3 provides multifactor remote network authentication. At this level, identity-proofing procedures require verification of identifying materials and information. Authentication is based on proof of possession of a key or password through a cryptographic protocol. Cryptographic strength mechanisms should protect the primary authentication token (a cryptographic key) against compromise by the protocol threats, including eavesdropper, replay, online guessing, verifier impersonation, and man-in-the-middle attacks. A minimum of two authentication factors is required. Three kinds of tokens may be used: \n \n "soft" cryptographic token, which has the key stored on a general-purpose computer, \n "hard" cryptographic token, which has the key stored on a special hardware device, and \n "one-time password" device token, which has symmetric key stored on a personal hardware device that is a cryptographic module validated at FIPS 140-2 Level 1 or higher. Validation testing of cryptographic modules and algorithms for conformance to Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) 140-2, Security Requirements for Cryptographic Modules, is managed by NIST. \n \n Authentication requires that the claimant prove control of the token through a secure authentication protocol. The token must be unlocked with a password or biometric representation, or a password must be used in a secure authentication protocol, to establish two-factor authentication. Long-term shared authentication secrets, if used, are never revealed to any party except the claimant and verifiers operated directly by the CSP; however, session (temporary) shared secrets may be provided to independent verifiers by the CSP. Approved cryptographic techniques are used for all operations. Assertions issued about claimants as a result of a successful authentication are either cryptographically authenticated by relying parties (using approved methods) or are obtained directly from a trusted party via a secure authentication protocol. [Summary of the technical requirements specified in NIST SP 800-63 for the four levels of assurance defined by the December 2003, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued Memorandum M-04-04, E-Authentication Guidance for Federal Agencies.] \n		23680	active
5	LOAAN4	high authentication level of assurance	Indicator of high digital quality or reliability of the digital reliability of the verification and validation process used to verify the claimed identity of an entity by securely associating an identifier and its authenticator. [Based on ISO 7498-2] \n The degree of confidence in the vetting process used to establish the identity of the individual to whom the credential was issued, and 2) the degree of confidence that the individual who uses the credential is the individual to whom the credential was issued. [OMB M-04-04 E-Authentication Guidance for Federal Agencies] \n High authentication level of assurance indicates that the relying party may have very high confidence in the asserted identity's validity. Level 4 is for transactions that need very high confidence in the accuracy of the asserted identity. Level 4 provides the highest practical assurance of remote network authentication. Authentication is based on proof of possession of a key through a cryptographic protocol. This level is similar to Level 3 except that only â€œhardâ€? cryptographic tokens are allowed, cryptographic module validation requirements are strengthened, and subsequent critical data transfers must be authenticated via a key that is bound to the authentication process. The token should be a hardware cryptographic module validated at FIPS 140-2 Level 2 or higher overall with at least FIPS 140-2 Level 3 physical security. This level requires a physical token, which cannot readily be copied, and operator authentication at Level 2 and higher, and ensures good, two-factor remote authentication. \n Level 4 requires strong cryptographic authentication of all parties and all sensitive data transfers between the parties. Either public key or symmetric key technology may be used. Authentication requires that the claimant prove through a secure authentication protocol that the claimant controls the token. Eavesdropper, replay, online guessing, verifier impersonation, and man-in-the-middle attacks are prevented. Long-term shared authentication secrets, if used, are never revealed to any party except the claimant and verifiers operated directly by the CSP; however, session (temporary) shared secrets may be provided to independent verifiers by the CSP. Strong approved cryptographic techniques are used for all operations. All sensitive data transfers are cryptographically authenticated using keys bound to the authentication process. [Summary of the technical requirements specified in NIST SP 800-63 for the four levels of assurance defined by the December 2003, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued Memorandum M-04-04, E-Authentication Guidance for Federal Agencies.] \n		23681	active
4	LOAAP	authentication process level of assurance value	The value assigned as the indicator of the digital quality or reliability of a defined sequence of messages between a Claimant and a Verifier that demonstrates that the Claimant has possession and control of a valid token to establish his/her identity, and optionally, demonstrates to the Claimant that he or she is communicating with the intended Verifier. [Based on NIST SP 800-63-2] \n		23682	active		true
5	LOAAP1	low authentication process level of assurance	Indicator of the low digital quality or reliability of a defined sequence of messages between a Claimant and a Verifier that demonstrates that the Claimant has possession and control of a valid token to establish his/her identity, and optionally, demonstrates to the Claimant that he or she is communicating with the intended Verifier. [Based on NIST SP 800-63-2] \n Low authentication process level of assurance indicates that (1) long-term shared authentication secrets may be revealed to verifiers; and (2) assertions and assertion references require protection from manufacture/modification and reuse attacks. [Summary of the technical requirements specified in NIST SP 800-63 for the four levels of assurance defined by the December 2003, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued Memorandum M-04-04, E-Authentication Guidance for Federal Agencies.] \n		23683	active
5	LOAAP2	basic authentication process level of assurance	Indicator of the basic digital quality or reliability of a defined sequence of messages between a Claimant and a Verifier that demonstrates that the Claimant has possession and control of a valid token to establish his/her identity, and optionally, demonstrates to the Claimant that he or she is communicating with the intended Verifier. [Based on NIST SP 800-63-2] \n Basic authentication process level of assurance indicates that long-term shared authentication secrets are never revealed to any other party except Credential Service Provider (CSP). Sessions (temporary) shared secrets may be provided to independent verifiers by CSP. Long-term shared authentication secrets, if used, are never revealed to any other party except Verifiers operated by the Credential Service Provider (CSP); however, session (temporary) shared secrets may be provided to independent Verifiers by the CSP. In addition to Level 1 requirements, assertions are resistant to disclosure, redirection, capture and substitution attacks. Approved cryptographic techniques are required. [Summary of the technical requirements specified in NIST SP 800-63 for the four levels of assurance defined by the December 2003, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued Memorandum M-04-04, E-Authentication Guidance for Federal Agencies.] \n		23684	active
5	LOAAP3	medium authentication process level of assurance	Indicator of the medium digital quality or reliability of a defined sequence of messages between a Claimant and a Verifier that demonstrates that the Claimant has possession and control of a valid token to establish his/her identity, and optionally, demonstrates to the Claimant that he or she is communicating with the intended Verifier. [Based on NIST SP 800-63-2] \n Medium authentication process level of assurance indicates that the token can be unlocked with password, biometric, or uses a secure multi-token authentication protocol to establish two-factor authentication. Long-term shared authentication secrets are never revealed to any party except the Claimant and Credential Service Provider (CSP). \n Authentication requires that the Claimant prove, through a secure authentication protocol, that he or she controls the token. The Claimant unlocks the token with a password or biometric, or uses a secure multi-token authentication protocol to establish two-factor authentication (through proof of possession of a physical or software token in combination with some memorized secret knowledge). Long-term shared authentication secrets, if used, are never revealed to any party except the Claimant and Verifiers operated directly by the CSP; however, session (temporary) shared secrets may be provided to independent Verifiers by the CSP. In addition to Level 2 requirements, assertions are protected against repudiation by the Verifier. \n		23685	active
5	LOAAP4	high authentication process level of assurance	Indicator of the high digital quality or reliability of a defined sequence of messages between a Claimant and a Verifier that demonstrates that the Claimant has possession and control of a valid token to establish his/her identity, and optionally, demonstrates to the Claimant that he or she is communicating with the intended Verifier. [Based on NIST SP 800-63-2] \n High authentication process level of assurance indicates all sensitive data transfer are cryptographically authenticated using keys bound to the authentication process. Level 4 requires strong cryptographic authentication of all communicating parties and all sensitive data transfers between the parties. Either public key or symmetric key technology may be used. Authentication requires that the Claimant prove through a secure authentication protocol that he or she controls the token. All protocol threats at Level 3 are required to be prevented at Level 4. Protocols shall also be strongly resistant to man-in-the-middle attacks. Long-term shared authentication secrets, if used, are never revealed to any party except the Claimant and Verifiers operated directly by the CSP; however, session (temporary) shared secrets may be provided to independent Verifiers by the CSP. Approved cryptographic techniques are used for all operations. All sensitive data transfers are cryptographically authenticated using keys bound to the authentication process. [Summary of the technical requirements specified in NIST SP 800-63 for the four levels of assurance defined by the December 2003, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued Memorandum M-04-04, E-Authentication Guidance for Federal Agencies.] \n		23686	active
4	LOAAS	assertion level of assurance value	The value assigned as the indicator of the high quality or reliability of the statement from a Verifier to a Relying Party (RP) that contains identity information about a Subscriber. Assertions may also contain verified attributes. \n		23687	active		true
5	LOAAS1	low assertion level of assurance	Indicator of the low quality or reliability of the statement from a Verifier to a Relying Party (RP) that contains identity information about a Subscriber. Assertions may also contain verified attributes. \n Assertions and assertion references require protection from modification and reuse attacks. [Summary of the technical requirements specified in NIST SP 800-63 for the four levels of assurance defined by the December 2003, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued Memorandum M-04-04, E-Authentication Guidance for Federal Agencies.] \n		23688	active
5	LOAAS2	basic assertion level of assurance	Indicator of the basic quality or reliability of the statement from a Verifier to a Relying Party (RP) that contains identity information about a Subscriber. Assertions may also contain verified attributes. \n Assertions are resistant to disclosure, redirection, capture and substitution attacks. Approved cryptographic techniques are required for all assertion protocols. [Summary of the technical requirements specified in NIST SP 800-63 for the four levels of assurance defined by the December 2003, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued Memorandum M-04-04, E-Authentication Guidance for Federal Agencies.] \n		23689	active
5	LOAAS3	medium assertion level of assurance	Indicator of the medium quality or reliability of the statement from a Verifier to a Relying Party (RP) that contains identity information about a Subscriber. Assertions may also contain verified attributes. \n Assertions are protected against repudiation by the verifier. [Summary of the technical requirements specified in NIST SP 800-63 for the four levels of assurance defined by the December 2003, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued Memorandum M-04-04, E-Authentication Guidance for Federal Agencies.] \n		23690	active
5	LOAAS4	high assertion level of assurance	Indicator of the high quality or reliability of the statement from a Verifier to a Relying Party (RP) that contains identity information about a Subscriber. Assertions may also contain verified attributes. \n Strongly resistant to man-in-the-middle attacks. "Bearer" assertions are not used. "Holder-of-key" assertions may be used. RP maintains records of the assertions. [Summary of the technical requirements specified in NIST SP 800-63 for the four levels of assurance defined by the December 2003, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued Memorandum M-04-04, E-Authentication Guidance for Federal Agencies.] \n		23691	active
4	LOACM	token and credential management level of assurance value)	Indicator of the digital quality or reliability of the activities performed by the Credential Service Provider (CSP) subsequent to electronic authentication registration, identity proofing and issuance activities to manage and safeguard the integrity of an issued credential and its binding to an identity. [Electronic Authentication Guideline - Recommendations of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST Special Publication 800-63-1, Dec 2011] \n		23712	active		true
5	LOACM1	low token and credential management level of assurance	Indicator of the low digital quality or reliability of the activities performed by the Credential Service Provider (CSP) subsequent to electronic authentication registration, identity proofing and issuance activities to manage and safeguard the integrity of an issued credential and its binding to an identity. Little or no confidence that an individual has maintained control over a token that has been entrusted to him or her and that that token has not been compromised. Characteristics include weak identity binding to tokens and plaintext passwords or secrets not transmitted across a network. [Electronic Authentication Guideline - Recommendations of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST Special Publication 800-63-1, Dec 2011] \n		23713	active
5	LOACM2	basic token and credential management level of assurance	Indicator of the basic digital quality or reliability of the activities performed by the Credential Service Provider (CSP) subsequent to electronic authentication registration, identity proofing and issuance activities to manage and safeguard the integrity of an issued credential and its binding to an identity. Some confidence that an individual has maintained control over a token that has been entrusted to him or her and that that token has not been compromised. Characteristics include: Verification must prove claimant controls the token; token resists online guessing, replay, session hijacking, and eavesdropping attacks; and token is at least weakly resistant to man-in-the middle attacks. [Electronic Authentication Guideline - Recommendations of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST Special Publication 800-63-1, Dec 2011] \n		23714	active
5	LOACM3	medium token and credential management level of assurance	Indicator of the medium digital quality or reliability of the activities performed by the Credential Service Provider (CSP) subsequent to electronic authentication registration, identity proofing and issuance activities to manage and safeguard the integrity of an issued credential and it's binding to an identity. High confidence that an individual has maintained control over a token that has been entrusted to him or her and that that token has not been compromised. Characteristics include: Ownership of token verifiable through security authentication protocol and credential management protects against verifier impersonation attacks. [Electronic Authentication Guideline - Recommendations of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST Special Publication 800-63-1, Dec 2011] \n		23715	active
5	LOACM4	high token and credential management level of assurance	Indicator of the high digital quality or reliability of the activities performed by the Credential Service Provider (CSP) subsequent to electronic authentication registration, identity proofing and issuance activities to manage and safeguard the integrity of an issued credential and it's binding to an identity. Very high confidence that an individual has maintained control over a token that has been entrusted to him or her and that that token has not been compromised. Characteristics include: Verifier can prove control of token through a secure protocol; credential management supports strong cryptographic authentication of all communication parties. [Electronic Authentication Guideline - Recommendations of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST Special Publication 800-63-1, Dec 2011] \n		23716	active
4	LOAID	identity proofing level of assurance	Indicator of the quality or reliability in the process of ascertaining that an individual is who he or she claims to be. \n		23692	active		true
5	LOAID1	low identity proofing level of assurance	Indicator of low digital quality or reliability in the process of ascertaining that an individual is who he or she claims to be. Requires that a continuity of identity be maintained but does not require identity proofing. [Based on Electronic Authentication Guideline - Recommendations of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST Special Publication 800-63-1, Dec 2011] \n		23693	active
5	LOAID2	basic identity proofing level of assurance	Indicator of some digital quality or reliability in the process of ascertaining that that an individual is who he or she claims to be. Requires identity proofing via presentation of identifying material or information. [Based on Electronic Authentication Guideline - Recommendations of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST Special Publication 800-63-1, Dec 2011] \n		23694	active
5	LOAID3	medium identity proofing level of assurance	Indicator of high digital quality or reliability in the process of ascertaining that an individual is who he or she claims to be. Requires identity proofing procedures for verification of identifying materials and information. [Based on Electronic Authentication Guideline - Recommendations of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST Special Publication 800-63-1, Dec 2011] \n		23695	active
5	LOAID4	high identity proofing level of assurance	Indicator of high digital quality or reliability in the process of ascertaining that an individual is who he or she claims to be. Requires identity proofing procedures for verification of identifying materials and information. [Based on Electronic Authentication Guideline - Recommendations of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST Special Publication 800-63-1, Dec 2011] \n		23696	active
4	LOANR	non-repudiation level of assurance value	Indicator of the digital quality or reliability in the process of establishing proof of delivery and proof of origin. [Based on ISO 7498-2] \n		23697	active		true
5	LOANR1	low non-repudiation level of assurance	Indicator of low digital quality or reliability in the process of establishing proof of delivery and proof of origin. [Based on ISO 7498-2] \n		23698	active
5	LOANR2	basic non-repudiation level of assurance	Indicator of basic digital quality or reliability in the process of establishing proof of delivery and proof of origin. [Based on ISO 7498-2] \n		23699	active
5	LOANR3	medium non-repudiation level of assurance	Indicator of medium digital quality or reliability in the process of establishing proof of delivery and proof of origin. [Based on ISO 7498-2] \n		23700	active
5	LOANR4	high non-repudiation level of assurance	Indicator of high digital quality or reliability in the process of establishing proof of delivery and proof of origin. [Based on ISO 7498-2] \n		23701	active
4	LOARA	remote access level of assurance value	Indicator of the digital quality or reliability of the information exchange between network-connected devices where the information cannot be reliably protected end-to-end by a single organization's security controls. [Based on NIST SP 800-63-2] \n		23702	active		true
5	LOARA1	low remote access level of assurance	Indicator of low digital quality or reliability of the information exchange between network-connected devices where the information cannot be reliably protected end-to-end by a single organization's security controls. [Based on NIST SP 800-63-2] \n		23703	active
5	LOARA2	basic remote access level of assurance	Indicator of basic digital quality or reliability of the information exchange between network-connected devices where the information cannot be reliably protected end-to-end by a single organization's security controls. [Based on NIST SP 800-63-2] \n		23704	active
5	LOARA3	medium remote access level of assurance	Indicator of medium digital quality or reliability of the information exchange between network-connected devices where the information cannot be reliably protected end-to-end by a single organization's security controls. [Based on NIST SP 800-63-2] \n		23705	active
5	LOARA4	high remote access level of assurance	Indicator of high digital quality or reliability of the information exchange between network-connected devices where the information cannot be reliably protected end-to-end by a single organization's security controls. [Based on NIST SP 800-63-2] \n		23706	active
4	LOATK	token level of assurance value	Indicator of the digital quality or reliability of single and multi-token authentication. [Electronic Authentication Guideline - Recommendations of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST Special Publication 800-63-1, Dec 2011] \n		23707	active		true
5	LOATK1	low token level of assurance	Indicator of the low digital quality or reliability of single and multi-token authentication. Permits the use of any of the token methods of Levels 2, 3, or 4. [Electronic Authentication Guideline - Recommendations of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST Special Publication 800-63-1, Dec 2011] \n		23708	active
5	LOATK2	basic token level of assurance	Indicator of the basic digital quality or reliability of single and multi-token authentication. Requires single factor authentication using memorized secret tokens, pre-registered knowledge tokens, look-up secret tokens, out of band tokens, or single factor one-time password devices. [Electronic Authentication Guideline - Recommendations of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST Special Publication 800-63-1, Dec 2011] \n		23709	active
5	LOATK3	medium token level of assurance	Indicator of the medium digital quality or reliability of single and multi-token authentication. Requires two authentication factors. Provides multi-factor remote network authentication. Permits multi-factor software cryptographic token. [Electronic Authentication Guideline - Recommendations of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST Special Publication 800-63-1, Dec 2011] \n		23710	active
5	LOATK4	high token level of assurance	Indicator of the high digital quality or reliability of single and multi-token authentication. Requires token that is a hardware cryptographic module validated at validated at Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) 140-2 Level 2 or higher overall with at least FIPS 140-2 Level 3 physical security. Level 4 token requirements can be met by using the PIV authentication key of a FIPS 201 compliant Personal Identity Verification (PIV) Card. [Electronic Authentication Guideline - Recommendations of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST Special Publication 800-63-1, Dec 2011] \n		23711	active
3	TRSTMECOBV	none supplied 6	Values for security trust mechanism metadata observation made about a security architecture system component that supports enforcement of security policies. \n		23718	active
1	_SeverityObservation	SeverityObservation	Potential values for observations of severity. \n		21100	active		true
2	H	High	Indicates the condition may be life-threatening or has the potential to cause permanent injury. \n		16644	active
2	L	Low	Indicates the condition may result in some adverse consequences but is unlikely to substantially affect the situation of the subject. \n		16646	active
2	M	Moderate	Indicates the condition may result in noticable adverse adverse consequences but is unlikely to be life-threatening or cause permanent injury. \n		16645	active
1	_SubjectBodyPosition	_SubjectBodyPosition	Contains codes for defining the observed, physical position of a subject, such as during an observation, assessment, collection of a specimen, etc. ECG waveforms and vital signs, such as blood pressure, are two examples where a general, observed position typically needs to be noted. \n		22917	active		true
2	LLD	left lateral decubitus	Lying on the left side. \n		22918	active
2	PRN	prone	Lying with the front or ventral surface downward; lying face down. \n		22919	active
2	RLD	right lateral decubitus	Lying on the right side. \n		22920	active
2	SFWL	Semi-Fowler's	A semi-sitting position in bed with the head of the bed elevated approximately 45 degrees. \n		22921	active
2	SIT	sitting	Resting the body on the buttocks, typically with upper torso erect or semi erect. \n		22922	active
2	STN	standing	To be stationary, upright, vertical, on one's legs. \n		22923	active
2	SUP	supine			22924	active
3	RTRD	reverse trendelenburg	Lying on the back, on an inclined plane, typically about 30-45 degrees with head raised and feet lowered. \n		22925	active
3	TRD	trendelenburg	Lying on the back, on an inclined plane, typically about 30-45 degrees, with head lowered and feet raised. \n		22926	active
1	_VerificationOutcomeValue	verification outcome	Values for observations of verification act results \n Examples: Verified, not verified, verified with warning. \n		21906	active		true
2	ACT	active coverage	Definition: Coverage is in effect for healthcare service(s) and/or product(s). \n		22213	active
2	ACTPEND	active - pending investigation	Definition: Coverage is in effect for healthcare service(s) and/or product(s) - Pending Investigation \n		22214	active
2	ELG	eligible	Definition: Coverage is in effect for healthcare service(s) and/or product(s). \n		22211	active
2	INACT	inactive	Definition: Coverage is not in effect for healthcare service(s) and/or product(s). \n		22215	active
2	INPNDINV	inactive - pending investigation	Definition: Coverage is not in effect for healthcare service(s) and/or product(s) - Pending Investigation. \n		22217	active
2	INPNDUPD	inactive - pending eligibility update	Definition: Coverage is not in effect for healthcare service(s) and/or product(s) - Pending Eligibility Update. \n		22216	active
2	NELG	not eligible	Definition: Coverage is not in effect for healthcare service(s) and/or product(s). May optionally include reasons for the ineligibility. \n		22212	active
1	_WorkSchedule	_WorkSchedule	Concepts that describe an individual's typical arrangement of working hours for an occupation. \n		23907	active		true
2	DS	daytime shift	A person who is scheduled for work during daytime hours (for example between 6am and 6pm) on a regular basis. \n		23908	active
2	EMS	early morning shift	Consistent Early morning schedule of 13 hours or less per shift (between 2 am and 2 pm) \n		23911	active
2	ES	evening shift	A person who is scheduled for work during evening hours (for example between 2pm and midnight) on a regular basis. \n		23909	active
2	NS	night shift	Scheduled for work during nighttime hours (for example between 9pm and 8am) on a regular basis. \n		23910	active
2	RSWN	rotating shift with nights	Scheduled for work times that change periodically between days, and/or evenings, and includes some night shifts. \n		23912	active
2	RSWON	rotating shift without nights	Scheduled for work days/times that change periodically between days, but does not include night or evening work. \n		23913	active
2	SS	split shift	Shift consisting of two distinct work periods each day that are separated by a break of a few hours (for example 2 to 4 hours) \n		23914	active
2	VLS	very long shift	Shifts of 17 or more hours. \n		23915	active
2	VS	variable shift	Irregular, unpredictable hours scheduled on a short notice (for example, less than 2 day notice): inconsistent schedule, on-call, as needed, as available. \n		23916	active
1	_AnnotationValue	AnnotationValue			21095	retired		true
2	_ECGAnnotationValue	ECGAnnotationValue			21097	retired		true
1	_CommonClinicalObservationValue	common clinical observation	Description:Used in a patient care message to value simple clinical (non-lab) observations. \n		21945	retired		true
2	_CommonClinicalObservationAssertionValue	CommonClinicalObservationAssertionValue	Definition: The non-laboratory, non-DI (diagnostic imaging) coded observation if no value is also required to convey the full meaning of the observation. This may be a single concept code or a complex expression. \n		22262	retired		true
2	_CommonClinicalObservationResultValue	CommonClinicalObservationResultValue	Definition: The non-laboratory, non-diagnostic imaging coded result of the coded observable or "question" represented by the paired concept from the the NonLabDICodedObservationType domain. \n ] \n Examples:An APGAR result, a functional assessment, etc. The value must not require a specific unit of measure. \n		22263	retired		true
1	_CoverageChemicalDependencyValue	CoverageChemicalDependencyValue	Definition: The category of addiction used for coverage purposes that may refer to a substance, the consumption of which may result in physical or emotional harm. \n		22242	retired		true
1	_IndividualCaseSafetyReportValueDomains	Individual Case Safety Report Value Domains	This domain is established as a parent to a variety of value domains being defined to support the communication of Individual Case Safety Reports to regulatory bodies. Arguably, this aggregation is not taxonomically pure, but the grouping will facilitate the management of these domains. \n		21397	retired		true
2	_CaseSeriousnessCriteria	CaseSeriousnessCriteria	A code that provides information on the overall effect or outcome of the adverse reaction/adverse event reported in the ICSR. Note the criterion applies to the case as a whole and not to an individual reaction. \n Example concepts are: death, disability, hospitalization, congenital anomaly/ birth defect, and other medically important condition. \n		21398	retired		true
2	_DeviceManufacturerEvaluationInterpretation	DeviceManufacturerEvaluationInterpretation	A code set that includes codes that are used to characterize the outcome of the device evaluation process. The code defines the manufacturer's conclusions following the evaluation. \n Examples include: inadequate alarms, device maintenance contributed to event, device failed just prior to use, user error caused event \n		21405	retired		true
2	_DeviceManufacturerEvaluationMethod	DeviceManufacturerEvaluationMethod	Code assigned to indicate a relevant fact within the context of the evaluation of a reported product. There are a number of concept types including the status of the evaluation, the type of evaluation findings, and the type of activity carried out as part of the evaluation process. \n Examples include: Actual device involved in incident was evaluated, electrical tests performed, visual examination. \n		21406	retired		true
2	_DeviceManufacturerEvaluationResult	DeviceManufacturerEvaluationResult	Code assigned to indicate an outcome of the manufacturer's investigation of a product for which a defect has been reported. \n Examples include:.component/subassembly failure: air cleaner, computer-, imaging system-, microprocessor-controlled device problem: cache memory, design -- not fail safe. \n		21404	retired		true
2	_PertinentReactionRelatedness	Pertinent Reaction Relatedness	A code to capture the reporter's assessment of the extent to which the reaction is related to the suspect product reported in the ICSR. \n Example concepts include: related, not related, possibly related and unlikely related. \n		21401	retired		true
2	_ProductCharacterization	Product Characterization	A code that characterizes the role that the primary reporter felt that the suspect intervention -- either a substance administration or a device related procedure - played in the incident being reported. This code will capture the primary reporter's assessment of the role that the suspect product played in the incident reported in the ICSR. \n Examples include: Suspect, Concomitant, Interacting, Re-challenge. \n		21400	retired		true
2	_ReactionActionTaken	ReactionActionTaken	Code used to indicate the action taken by practitioner in response to the problem (whether drug or device related) that is reported in the ICSR. \n Examples include: failing device replaced, medication stopped, medication dose adjusted. \n		21407	retired		true
2	_SubjectReaction	Subject Reaction	A code to capture the kind of reaction that was suffered by the investigated subject, and that is being reported in the ICSR. At this point, SNOMED or MedDRA have been suggested as code systems to be used for providing this information. \n Example concepts include hives, swelling, rash, anaphylactic shock. \n		21399	retired		true
2	_SubjectReactionEmphasis	SubjectReactionEmphasis	Code that captures the emphasis that the reporter placed on this reaction. \n Examples include: highlighted by the reporter, NOT serious, Not highlighted by the reporter, NOT serious, Highlighted by the reporter, SERIOUS, Not highlighted by the reporter, SERIOUS. \n		21403	retired		true
2	_SubjectReactionOutcome	SubjectReactionOutcome	Code that captures the type of outcome from an individual outcome of a reaction to the suspect product reported in the ICSR. \n Examples include: Recovered/resolved. Recovering/resolving, Not recovered/not resolved, Recovered/resolved with sequelae, Fatal. \n		21402	retired		true
1	_InjuryObservationValue	InjuryObservationValue	Values for observations of injuries. \n		21098	retired		true
1	_IntoleranceValue	IntoleranceValue	Codes identifying pariticular groupings of allergens and other agents which cause allergies and intolerances. E.g. the drug, allergen group, food or environmental agent which triggers the intolerance \n		21495	retired		true
1	_IssueTriggerObservationValue	IssueTriggerObservationValue	The combined domain for different types of coded observation issue triggers, such as diagnoses, allergies, etc. \n		21528	retired		true
1	_OtherIndicationValue	OtherIndicationValue	Indicates an observed reason for a medical action other than an indication or symptom. E.g. Need for a contrast agent prior to a diagnostic image, need for anesthesia prior to surgery, etc. \n		21544	retired		true
1	_IndicationValue	IndicationValue	Indicates the specific observation result which is the reason for the action (prescription, lab test, etc.). E.g. Headache, Ear infection, planned diagnostic image (requiring contrast agent), etc. \n		21542	retired		true
2	_DiagnosisValue	DiagnosisValue	Diagnosis Value \n		21096	retired		true
2	_SymptomValue	SymptomValue	Indicates an observed abnormality in the patientaTMs condition, but does not assert causation. E.g. Runny nose, swelling, flaky skin, etc. \n		21543	retired		true