HL7 Terminology
1.0.0 - Publication

This page is part of the HL7 Terminology (v1.0.0: Release) based on FHIR R4. This is the current published version. For a full list of available versions, see the Directory of published versions

x_ActRelationshipPertinentInfo

Summary

Defining URL:http://terminology.hl7.org/ValueSet/v3-xActRelationshipPertinentInfo
Version:2.0.0
Name:XActRelationshipPertinentInfo
Status:Active
Title:x_ActRelationshipPertinentInfo
OID:2.16.840.1.113883.1.11.19562 (for OID based terminology systems)
Source Resource:XML / JSON / Turtle

References

This value set is not used

Content Logical Definition

Logical Definition (CLD)

  • Include these codes as defined in http://terminology.hl7.org/CodeSystem/v3-ActRelationshipType
    CodeDisplay
    CAUSis etiology for**Description:** An assertion that an act was the cause of another act.This is stronger and more specific than the support link. The source (cause) is typically an observation, but may be any act, while the target may be any act.

    **Examples:**

    * a growth of Staphylococcus aureus may be considered the cause of an abscess
    * contamination of the infusion bag was deemed to be the cause of the infection that the patient experienced
    * lack of staff on the shift was deemed to be a supporting factor (proximal factor) causing the patient safety incident where the patient fell out of bed because the bed-sides had not been put up which caused the night patient to fall out of bed
    MFSTis manifestation ofAn assertion that a new observation may be the manifestation of another existing observation or action. This assumption is attributed to the same actor who asserts the manifestation. This is stronger and more specific than an inverted support link. For example, an agitated appearance can be asserted to be the manifestation (effect) of a known hyperthyroxia. This expresses that one might not have realized a symptom if it would not be a common manifestation of a known condition. The target (cause) may be any service, while the source (manifestation) must be an observation.
    REFRrefers toA relationship in which the target act is referred to by the source act. This permits a simple reference relationship that distinguishes between the referent and the referee.
    SPRThas supportUsed to indicate that an existing service is suggesting evidence for a new observation. The assumption of support is attributed to the same actor who asserts the observation. Source must be an observation, target may be any service (e.g., to indicate a status post).
    SUBJhas subjectRelates an Act to its subject Act that the first Act is primarily concerned with.

    Examples

    1. The first Act may be a ControlAct manipulating the subject Act
    2. The first act is a region of interest (ROI) that defines a region within the subject Act.
    3. The first act is a reporting or notification Act, that echos the subject Act for a specific new purpose.

    Constraints

    An Act may have multiple subject acts.

    Rationale

    The ActRelationshipType "has subject" is similar to the ParticipationType "subject", Acts that primarily operate on physical subjects use the Participation, those Acts that primarily operate on other Acts (other information) use the ActRelationship.

 

Expansion

This value set contains 5 concepts

Expansion based on ActRelationshipType v2.0.0 (CodeSystem)

All codes from system http://terminology.hl7.org/CodeSystem/v3-ActRelationshipType

CodeDisplayDefinition
CAUSis etiology for**Description:** An assertion that an act was the cause of another act.This is stronger and more specific than the support link. The source (cause) is typically an observation, but may be any act, while the target may be any act. **Examples:** * a growth of Staphylococcus aureus may be considered the cause of an abscess * contamination of the infusion bag was deemed to be the cause of the infection that the patient experienced * lack of staff on the shift was deemed to be a supporting factor (proximal factor) causing the patient safety incident where the patient fell out of bed because the bed-sides had not been put up which caused the night patient to fall out of bed
MFSTis manifestation ofAn assertion that a new observation may be the manifestation of another existing observation or action. This assumption is attributed to the same actor who asserts the manifestation. This is stronger and more specific than an inverted support link. For example, an agitated appearance can be asserted to be the manifestation (effect) of a known hyperthyroxia. This expresses that one might not have realized a symptom if it would not be a common manifestation of a known condition. The target (cause) may be any service, while the source (manifestation) must be an observation.
REFRrefers toA relationship in which the target act is referred to by the source act. This permits a simple reference relationship that distinguishes between the referent and the referee.
SPRThas supportUsed to indicate that an existing service is suggesting evidence for a new observation. The assumption of support is attributed to the same actor who asserts the observation. Source must be an observation, target may be any service (e.g., to indicate a status post).
SUBJhas subjectRelates an Act to its subject Act that the first Act is primarily concerned with. Examples 1. The first Act may be a ControlAct manipulating the subject Act 2. The first act is a region of interest (ROI) that defines a region within the subject Act. 3. The first act is a reporting or notification Act, that echos the subject Act for a specific new purpose. Constraints An Act may have multiple subject acts. Rationale The ActRelationshipType "has subject" is similar to the ParticipationType "subject", Acts that primarily operate on physical subjects use the Participation, those Acts that primarily operate on other Acts (other information) use the ActRelationship.

Explanation of the columns that may appear on this page:

Level A few code lists that FHIR defines are hierarchical - each code is assigned a level. In this scheme, some codes are under other codes, and imply that the code they are under also applies
Source The source of the definition of the code (when the value set draws in codes defined elsewhere)
Code The code (used as the code in the resource instance)
Display The display (used in the display element of a Coding). If there is no display, implementers should not simply display the code, but map the concept into their application
Definition An explanation of the meaning of the concept
Comments Additional notes about how to use the code

History

DateActionAuthorCustodianComment
2020-05-06reviseTed KleinVocabulary WGMigrated to the UTG maintenance environment and publishing tooling.
2014-03-26reviseVocabulary (Woody Beeler) (no record of original request)2014T1_2014-03-26_001283 (RIM release ID)Lock all vaue sets untouched since 2014-03-26 to trackingId 2014T1_2014_03_26