HL7 Version 2 to FHIR
1.0.0-ballot - ballot
HL7 Version 2 to FHIR
1.0.0-ballot - ballot
HL7 Version 2 to FHIR, published by HL7 International / Orders and Observations. This guide is not an authorized publication; it is the continuous build for version 1.0.0-ballot built by the FHIR (HL7® FHIR® Standard) CI Build. This version is based on the current content of https://github.com/HL7/v2-to-fhir/ and changes regularly. See the Directory of published versions
| Official URL: http://hl7.org/fhir/uv/v2mappings/segment-dg1-to-condition | Version: 1.0.0-ballot | |||
| Active as of 2024-12-20 | Computable Name: SegmentDG1ToCondition | |||
Copyright/Legal: Copyright (c) 2020, HL7 International, Inc., All Rights Reserved. |
||||
This ConceptMap represents a mapping from the HL7 V2 Segment DG1 to the FHIR Condition Resource.
This ConceptMap represents the mapping from the HL7 V2 DG1 Segment to the FHIR Condition Resource. See also the FHIR Shorthand or the CSV Source.
| HL7 v2 | Condition (IF True, args) | HL7 FHIR | Comments | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sort Order | Identifier | Name | Data Type | Cardinality - Min | Cardinality - Max | Computable ANTLR | Computable FHIRPath | Narrative | FHIR Attribute | Extension | Data Type | Cardinality - Min | Cardinality - Max | Data Type Mapping | Vocabulary Mapping (IS, ID, CE, CEN, CWE) | Assignment | |
| 1 | DG1-1 | Set ID | SI | 1 | 1 | ||||||||||||
| 2 | DG1-2 | Diagnosis Coding Method | ID | 1 | 1 | ||||||||||||
| 3 | DG1-3 | Diagnosis Code | CWE | 1 | 1 | Condition.code | Condition.CodeableConcept | 0 | 1 | CWE[CodeableConcept] | |||||||
| 4 | DG1-4 | Diagnosis Description | ST | 0 | 1 | Condition.code.text | 0 | 1 | |||||||||
| 5 | DG1-5 | Diagnosis Date/Time | DTM | 0 | 1 | Condition.onsetDateTime | Condition.DateTime | 0 | 1 | Should confirm that these two concepts are equivalent. Condition.recordedDate is also available | |||||||
| 6 | DG1-6 | Diagnosis Type | CWE | 1 | 1 | ||||||||||||
| 7 | DG1-7 | Major Diagnostic Category | CE | 0 | 1 | ||||||||||||
| 8 | DG1-8 | Diagnostic Related Group | CE | 0 | 1 | ||||||||||||
| 9 | DG1-9 | DRG Approval Indicator | ID | 0 | 1 | ||||||||||||
| 10 | DG1-10 | DRG Grouper Review Code | IS | 0 | 1 | ||||||||||||
| 11 | DG1-11 | Outlier Type | CE | 0 | 1 | ||||||||||||
| 12 | DG1-12 | Outlier Days | NM | 0 | 1 | ||||||||||||
| 13 | DG1-13 | Outlier Cost | CP | 0 | 1 | ||||||||||||
| 14 | DG1-14 | Grouper Version And Type | ST | 0 | 1 | ||||||||||||
| 15 | DG1-15 | Diagnosis Priority | NM | 0 | 1 | Could contribute to Condition.category or be a new extension | |||||||||||
| 16 | DG1-16 | Diagnosing Clinician | XCN | 0 | -1 | Condition.asserter(Condition.Practitioner) | Reference | 0 | 1 | XCN[Practitioner] | Condition.recorder is also an option. Neither of these fields can repeat like DG1-16 can. | ||||||
| 17 | DG1-17 | Diagnosis Classification | CWE | 0 | 1 | ||||||||||||
| 18 | DG1-18 | Confidential Indicator | ID | 0 | 1 | ||||||||||||
| 19 | DG1-19 | Attestation Date/Time | DTM | 0 | 1 | Condition.extension.url | Condition.uri | 1 | 1 | "http://www.hl7.org/fhir/extension-condition-asserteddate" | |||||||
| 19 | DG1-19 | Attestation Date/Time | DTM | 0 | 1 | Condition.extension.valueDateTime | Condition.dateTime | 1 | 1 | It is unclear whether to use recorded or asserted date. What is your opinion? | |||||||
| 19 | DG1-19 | Attestation Date/Time | DTM | 0 | 1 | Condition.recordedDate | Condition.dateTime | 0 | 1 | It is unclear whether to use recorded or asserted date. What is your opinion? | |||||||
| 20 | DG1-20 | Diagnosis Identifier | EI | 0 | 1 | Condition.identifier | Condition.identifier | 0 | -1 | EI[Identifier-Extension] | |||||||
| 21 | DG1-21 | Diagnosis Action Code | ID | 0 | 1 | Condition.verificationStatus.coding.code | Condition.code | 0 | 1 | "entered-in-error" | Other values (A and U) don't map to anything | ||||||
| 21 | DG1-21 | Diagnosis Action Code | ID | 0 | 1 | Condition.verificationStatus.coding.system | Condition.uri | 0 | 1 | "http://terminology.hl7.org/CodeSystem/condition-ver-status" | |||||||
| 22 | DG1-22 | Parent Diagnosis | EI | 0 | 1 | Condition.extension.url | Condition.uri | 1 | 1 | "http://hl7.org/fhir/StructureDefinition/condition-dueTo" | |||||||
| 22 | DG1-22 | Parent Diagnosis | EI | 0 | 1 | Condition.extension.valueReference(Condition.Condition) | Reference | 1 | 1 | EI[Condition] | Extensions for occurredFollowing and related also exist | ||||||
| 23 | DG1-23 | DRG CCL Value Code | CWE | 0 | 1 | ||||||||||||
| 24 | DG1-24 | DRG Grouping Usage | ID | 0 | 1 | ||||||||||||
| 25 | DG1-25 | DRG Diagnosis Determination Status | CWE | 0 | 1 | ||||||||||||
| 26 | DG1-26 | Present On Admission (POA) Indicator | CWE | 0 | 1 | This could contribute to Condition.category, if that value set it extended to include multiple types of diagnoses | |||||||||||
Generated Narrative: ConceptMap segment-dg1-to-condition
Mapping from DG1 to Condition
Group 1 Mapping from unspecified code system to unspecified code system
| Source Code | Relationship | Target Code | Comment |
| DG1-3 (Diagnosis Code) | is equivalent to | code[1] | |
| DG1-4 (Diagnosis Description) | is equivalent to | code[1].text | |
| DG1-5 (Diagnosis Date/Time) | is equivalent to | onsetDateTime | Should confirm that these two concepts are equivalent. Condition.recordedDate is also available |
| DG1-16 (Diagnosing Clinician) | is equivalent to | asserter(Practitioner) | Condition.recorder is also an option. Neither of these fields can repeat like DG1-16 can. |
| DG1-19 (Attestation Date/Time) | is equivalent to | extension[1].url | |
| DG1-19 (Attestation Date/Time) | is equivalent to | extension[1].valueDateTime | It is unclear whether to use recorded or asserted date. What is your opinion? |
| DG1-19 (Attestation Date/Time) | is equivalent to | recordedDate | It is unclear whether to use recorded or asserted date. What is your opinion? |
| DG1-20 (Diagnosis Identifier) | is equivalent to | identifier | |
| DG1-21 (Diagnosis Action Code) | is equivalent to | verificationStatus.coding.code | Other values (A and U) don't map to anything |
| DG1-21 (Diagnosis Action Code) | is equivalent to | verificationStatus.coding.system | |
| DG1-22 (Parent Diagnosis) | is equivalent to | extension[2].url | |
| DG1-22 (Parent Diagnosis) | is equivalent to | extension[2].valueReference(Condition) | Extensions for occurredFollowing and related also exist |
IG © 2020+ HL7 International / Orders and Observations. Package hl7.fhir.uv.v2mappings#1.0.0-ballot based on FHIR 4.0.1. Generated 2024-12-20
Links: Table of Contents |
QA Report
| Version History |
|
Propose a change