A tracker item has been created to clarify the behaviour of $validate-code

https://gforge.hl7.org/gf/project/fhir/tracker/?action=TrackerItemEdit&tracker_item_id=17218

This came from a discussion of the ambiguity regarding the validation that should be done for the display term. For SNOMED CT for example, should this return true (i.e. valid) if the term provided to $validate-code matches

This comes partly down to the use case for performing this validation. Validating a code against a ValueSet makes sense to determine if someone has sent a valid code for the binding.

Validating the display is perhaps a bit more subtle. The most obvious use case is to validate if it is likely there is a mistake or not. For example it may be useful to know if a coded element's display term matches the code in the terminology as confirmation.

In the above case it is useful to know from $validate-code whether the term is a valid description for the code - at least all active descriptions. Receiving the FSN as the display is perhaps odd, and probably wrong (wouldn't imagine many clinical systems where it is valid for it to be the display term), but not unsafe (it is supposed to be unambiguous) and still useful for validation/confirmation.

In this scenario, requiring the specified term to be the preferred term is problematic - which language reference set is the first problem, but also if the version of the code system being used isn't specified it may not be possible to determine the right value even if the language reference set is known. Similarly if the version of the terminology isn't known, then matching inactive descriptions may be useful when dealing with old versions...but then descriptions are inactivated for a reason.

Perhaps a ternary valued response of "valid", "matches inactive description", and "invalid" would solve this issue...but adds complexity for something that is perhaps an edge case.

Questions

Group Discussion

26 June 2018 - Basically we really need to know what SNOMED Edition is being used, then we can come up with sensible behaviour. 

In general, valid codes should return "valid = true" and term issues should be identified as a warning in the message.  Any matching term should result in positive validation.

RH: If we had an option to specify a "strict" flag, then we could validate the term in a more exacting way.

DM: Developers want finer grained responses to enumerate the validation result of the term, distinct from the code.   Ontoserver currently validates the term if it's either the PT or FSN.  If not specified, the latest "default" edition for the server is used ie AU langrefset.   Note: Potential to make two calls - one without the term to check the code and then another with the term to check that also.

PJ: The value-set will define the language used, but this would not apply when validating against the code-system. 

If the URI that is passed is an edition, then hopefully we could look up a default (set?) of language reference sets.

Case sensitivity: To be discussed.


10 July 2018

Determined that it would be best to have multiple response parameters to capture the various possible scenarios so the client can choose the correct behaviour. Specifically discussed was adding a well known set of extension parameters which can be considered as optional response parameters in the specification in future.

The table below is intended to be built out to cover the various scenarios. Note that the philosophy with the boolean result parameter from validate-code is that it should return true if the code is correct, and only false if the text provided does not match at all, this is considered most fault tolerant for clients that don't use the additional parameters to discern the result more closely.

scenarioresultmessagedisplaycode validity codedisplay validity code
codetermValueSet term
valid codeno termnotrue
code system preferred displayvalid code in ValueSet-
valid codeno termyestrue
ValueSet display for codevalid code in ValueSet-
code not in ValueSetno termn/afalseexplanation the code is invalidcode system preferred displayvalid code not in ValueSet-
code not in ValueSetpreferred displayn/afalseexplanation the code is invalidcode system preferred displayvalid code not in ValueSetcorrect display term
code not in ValueSetacceptable termn/afalseexplanation the code is invalid and warning that the display was not the preferred displaycode system preferred displayvalid code in ValueSetacceptable display term
code not in ValueSetactive but unacceptable term for localen/afalseexplanation the code is invalid and warning that the display matches an active term for the code, but not an acceptable onecode system preferred displayvalid code in ValueSetactive display term
code not in ValueSetinactive/historical term for coden/afalseexplanation the code is invalid and warning the provided term is historical for the code and not activecode system preferred displayvalid code in ValueSethistorical display term
code not in ValueSetunknown term for code systemn/afalseexplanation the code is invalid and explanation that the term was unknowncode system preferred display
valid code in ValueSetunknown term
valid codepreferred displaynotrue
code system preferred displayvalid code in ValueSetcorrect display term
valid code preferred displayyestrueexplanation the display was valid for the code but didn't match the ValueSetValueSet display for codevalid code in ValueSetcorrect display term
valid codeacceptable termnotruewarning that the display was not the preferred displaycode system preferred displayvalid code in ValueSetacceptable display term
valid codeacceptable termyestrueexplanation the display was not preferred for the code and didn't match the ValueSetValueSet display for codevalid code in ValueSetcorrect display term
valid codeactive but unacceptable term for localenotruewarning that the display matches an active term for the code, but not an acceptable onecode system preferred displayvalid code in ValueSetactive display term
valid codeactive but unacceptable term for localeyestruewarning the display was not acceptable for the code and didn't match the ValueSetValueSet display for codevalid code in ValueSetcorrect display term
valid codeinactive/historical term for codenotruewarning the provided term is historical for the code and not activecode system preferred displayvalid code in ValueSethistorical display term
valid codeinactive/historical term for codeyestruewarning the provided term is historical for the code and didn't match the ValueSetValueSet display for codevalid code in ValueSetcorrect display term
valid codeunknown term for code systemnofalseexplanation that the term was unknowncode system preferred display
valid code in ValueSetunknown term
valid codeunknown term for code systemyestrue
ValueSet display for code
valid code in ValueSetcorrect display term
known code for code system family, but not in code system versionno termn/afalseexplanation the code was not valid for the code system versioncode system preferred displayknown code not in code system version-
known code for code system family, but not in code system version
preferred displayn/afalseexplanation the code was not valid for the code system versioncode system preferred displayknown code not in code system version
correct display term
known code for code system family, but not in code system version
acceptable termn/afalseexplanation the code was not valid for the code system versioncode system preferred displayknown code not in code system version
acceptable display term
known code for code system family, but not in code system version
active but unacceptable term for localen/afalseexplanation the code was not valid for the code system versioncode system preferred displayknown code not in code system version
active display term
known code for code system family, but not in code system version
inactive/historical term for coden/afalseexplanation the code was not valid for the code system versioncode system preferred displayknown code not in code system version
historical display term
known code for code system family, but not in code system version
unknown term for code systemn/afalseexplanation the code was not valid for the code system versioncode system preferred display
known code not in code system version
unknown term
syntactically valid code (i.e. concept SCTID) but not known to any version on the serverunknown or no termn/afalseexplanation the code was not valid for any known version for this code system-unknown but syntactically valid code
valid identifier for component other than a concept (e.g. description or relationship)unknown or no termn/afalseexplanation the code is not for the right type of component-incorrect identifier type
syntactically invalid codeunknown or no termn/afalseexplanation the code is syntactically invalid, doesn't meet the code system's scheme-code not valid for code system scheme

code validity and display validity are intended to be extensible bindings to a Code datatype.

This table needs further refinement and consideration of particularly whether all scenarios are worth the effort. Description handling is somewhat SNOMED CT specific, but generalisable to other code systems as most would fall under a subset of the scenarios (i.e. may not draw all the distinctions SNOMED CT does wrt term preferences).

Case significance status in SNOMED CT should also be taken into account, so "Heart structure" and "heart structure" would be matched equally for 80891009 and get the same display validity code as they are equivalent once case significance is taken into account.