A definition of a condition and information relevant to managing it.

The logical id of the resource, as used in the URL for the resource. Once assigned, this value never changes.

Within the context of the FHIR RESTful interactions, the resource has an id except for cases like the create and conditional update. Otherwise, the use of the resouce id depends on the given use case.

A reference to a set of rules that were followed when the resource was constructed, and which must be understood when processing the content. Often, this is a reference to an implementation guide that defines the special rules along with other profiles etc.

Asserting this rule set restricts the content to be only understood by a limited set of trading partners. This inherently limits the usefulness of the data in the long term. However, the existing health eco-system is highly fractured, and not yet ready to define, collect, and exchange data in a generally computable sense. Wherever possible, implementers and/or specification writers should avoid using this element. Often, when used, the URL is a reference to an implementation guide that defines these special rules as part of its narrative along with other profiles, value sets, etc.

These resources do not have an independent existence apart from the resource that contains them - they cannot be identified independently, nor can they have their own independent transaction scope. This is allowed to be a Parameters resource if and only if it is referenced by a resource that provides context/meaning.

This should never be done when the content can be identified properly, as once identification is lost, it is extremely difficult (and context dependent) to restore it again. Contained resources may have profiles and tags in their meta elements, but SHALL NOT have security labels.

May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the resource and that modifies the understanding of the element that contains it and/or the understanding of the containing element's descendants. Usually modifier elements provide negation or qualification. To make the use of extensions safe and managable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer is allowed to define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension. Applications processing a resource are required to check for modifier extensions.

Modifier extensions SHALL NOT change the meaning of any elements on Resource or DomainResource (including cannot change the meaning of modifierExtension itself).

There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.

Modifier extensions allow for extensions that cannot be safely ignored to be clearly distinguished from the vast majority of extensions which can be safely ignored. This promotes interoperability by eliminating the need for implementers to prohibit the presence of extensions. For further information, see the definition of modifier extensions.

An absolute URI that is used to identify this condition definition when it is referenced in a specification, model, design or an instance; also called its canonical identifier. This SHOULD be globally unique and SHOULD be a literal address at which an authoritative instance of this condition definition is (or will be) published. This URL can be the target of a canonical reference. It SHALL remain the same when the condition definition is stored on different servers.

Can be a urn:uuid: or a urn:oid: but real http: addresses are preferred. Multiple instances may share the same URL if they have a distinct version.

The determination of when to create a new version of a resource (same url, new version) vs. defining a new artifact is up to the author. Considerations for making this decision are found in Technical and Business Versions.

In some cases, the resource can no longer be found at the stated url, but the url itself cannot change. Implementations can use the meta.source element to indicate where the current master source of the resource can be found.

Allows the condition definition to be referenced by a single globally unique identifier.

A formal identifier that is used to identify this condition definition when it is represented in other formats, or referenced in a specification, model, design or an instance.

Typically, this is used for identifiers that can go in an HL7 V3 II (instance identifier) data type, and can then identify this condition definition outside of FHIR, where it is not possible to use the logical URI.

Allows externally provided and/or usable business identifiers to be easily associated with the module.

The identifier that is used to identify this version of the condition definition when it is referenced in a specification, model, design or instance. This is an arbitrary value managed by the condition definition author and is not expected to be globally unique. For example, it might be a timestamp (e.g. yyyymmdd) if a managed version is not available. There is also no expectation that versions can be placed in a lexicographical sequence.

There may be different condition definition instances that have the same identifier but different versions. The version can be appended to the url in a reference to allow a reference to a particular business version of the condition definition with the format [url]|[version]. The version SHOULD NOT contain a '#' - see Business Version.

Indicates the mechanism used to compare versions to determine which is more current.

If set as a string, this is a FHIRPath expression that has two additional context variables passed in - %version1 and %version2 and will return a negative number if version1 is newer, a positive number if version2 and a 0 if the version ordering can't be successfully be determined.

A natural language name identifying the condition definition. This name should be usable as an identifier for the module by machine processing applications such as code generation.

The name is not expected to be globally unique. The name should be a simple alphanumeric type name to ensure that it is machine-processing friendly.

Support human navigation and code generation.

A short, descriptive, user-friendly title for the condition definition.

This name does not need to be machine-processing friendly and may contain punctuation, white-space, etc.

An explanatory or alternate title for the event definition giving additional information about its content.

The status of this condition definition. Enables tracking the life-cycle of the content.

Allows filtering of condition definitions that are appropriate for use versus not.

See guidance around (not) making local changes to elements here.

The lifecycle status of an artifact.

A Boolean value to indicate that this condition definition is authored for testing purposes (or education/evaluation/marketing) and is not intended to be used for genuine usage.

Allows filtering of condition definitions that are appropriate for use versus not.

Enables experimental content to be developed following the same lifecycle that would be used for a production-level condition definition.

The date (and optionally time) when the condition definition was last significantly changed. The date must change when the business version changes and it must change if the status code changes. In addition, it should change when the substantive content of the condition definition changes.

The date is often not tracked until the resource is published, but may be present on draft content. Note that this is not the same as the resource last-modified-date, since the resource may be a secondary representation of the condition definition. Additional specific dates may be added as extensions or be found by consulting Provenances associated with past versions of the resource.

See guidance around (not) making local changes to elements here.

The name of the organization or individual responsible for the release and ongoing maintenance of the condition definition.

Usually an organization but may be an individual. The publisher (or steward) of the condition definition is the organization or individual primarily responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of the condition definition. This is not necessarily the same individual or organization that developed and initially authored the content. The publisher is the primary point of contact for questions or issues with the condition definition. This item SHOULD be populated unless the information is available from context.

Helps establish the "authority/credibility" of the condition definition. May also allow for contact.

Contact details to assist a user in finding and communicating with the publisher.

May be a web site, an email address, a telephone number, etc.

See guidance around (not) making local changes to elements here.

A free text natural language description of the condition definition from a consumer's perspective.

This description can be used to capture details such as comments about misuse, instructions for clinical use and interpretation, literature references, examples from the paper world, etc. It is not a rendering of the condition definition as conveyed in the 'text' field of the resource itself. This item SHOULD be populated unless the information is available from context (e.g. the language of the condition definition is presumed to be the predominant language in the place the condition definition was created).

The content was developed with a focus and intent of supporting the contexts that are listed. These contexts may be general categories (gender, age, ...) or may be references to specific programs (insurance plans, studies, ...) and may be used to assist with indexing and searching for appropriate condition definition instances.

When multiple useContexts are specified, there is no expectation that all or any of the contexts apply.

Assist in searching for appropriate content.

A code that identifies the type of context being specified by this usage context.

A code that specifies a type of context being specified by a usage context.

A value that defines the context specified in this context of use. The interpretation of the value is defined by the code.

A legal or geographic region in which the condition definition is intended to be used.

It may be possible for the condition definition to be used in jurisdictions other than those for which it was originally designed or intended.

DEPRECATION NOTE: For consistency, implementations are encouraged to migrate to using the new 'jurisdiction' code in the useContext element. (I.e. useContext.code indicating http://terminology.hl7.org/CodeSystem/usage-context-type#jurisdiction and useContext.valueCodeableConcept indicating the jurisdiction.)

Countries and regions within which this artifact is targeted for use.

Identification of the condition, problem or diagnosis.

0..1 to account for primarily narrative only resources.

A reference to a code defined by a terminology system.

Codes may be defined very casually in enumerations, or code lists, up to very formal definitions such as SNOMED CT - see the HL7 v3 Core Principles for more information. Ordering of codings is undefined and SHALL NOT be used to infer meaning. Generally, at most only one of the coding values will be labeled as UserSelected = true.

Allows for alternative encodings within a code system, and translations to other code systems.

The identification of the code system that defines the meaning of the symbol in the code.

The URI may be an OID (urn:oid:...) or a UUID (urn:uuid:...). OIDs and UUIDs SHALL be references to the HL7 OID registry. Otherwise, the URI should come from HL7's list of FHIR defined special URIs or it should be an absolute reference to some definition that establishes the system clearly and unambiguously.

Need to be unambiguous about the source of the definition of the symbol.

The version of the code system which was used when choosing this code. Note that a well-maintained code system does not need the version reported, because the meaning of codes is consistent across versions. However this cannot consistently be assured, and when the meaning is not guaranteed to be consistent, the version SHOULD be exchanged.

Where the terminology does not clearly define what string should be used to identify code system versions, the recommendation is to use the date (expressed in FHIR date format) on which that version was officially published as the version date.

A symbol in syntax defined by the system. The symbol may be a predefined code or an expression in a syntax defined by the coding system (e.g. post-coordination).

Need to refer to a particular code in the system.

A representation of the meaning of the code in the system, following the rules of the system.

Need to be able to carry a human-readable meaning of the code for readers that do not know the system.

Indicates that this coding was chosen by a user directly - e.g. off a pick list of available items (codes or displays).

Amongst a set of alternatives, a directly chosen code is the most appropriate starting point for new translations. There is some ambiguity about what exactly 'directly chosen' implies, and trading partner agreement may be needed to clarify the use of this element and its consequences more completely.

This has been identified as a clinical safety criterium - that this exact system/code pair was chosen explicitly, rather than inferred by the system based on some rules or language processing.

A human language representation of the concept as seen/selected/uttered by the user who entered the data and/or which represents the intended meaning of the user.

Very often the text is the same as a displayName of one of the codings.

The codes from the terminologies do not always capture the correct meaning with all the nuances of the human using them, or sometimes there is no appropriate code at all. In these cases, the text is used to capture the full meaning of the source.

A subjective assessment of the severity of the condition as evaluated by the clinician.

Coding of the severity with a terminology is preferred, where possible.

A subjective assessment of the severity of the condition as evaluated by the clinician.

The anatomical location where this condition manifests itself.

Only used if not implicit in code found in ConditionDefinition.code. If the use case requires attributes from the BodySite resource (e.g. to identify and track separately) then use the standard extension http://hl7.org/fhir/StructureDefinition/bodySite. May be a summary code, or a reference to a very precise definition of the location, or both.

SNOMED CT Body site concepts

Clinical stage or grade of a condition. May include formal severity assessments.

Codes describing condition stages (e.g. Cancer stages).

Whether Severity is appropriate to collect for this condition.

Whether bodySite is appropriate to collect for this condition.

Whether stage is appropriate to collect for this condition.

Formal definitions of the condition. These may be references to ontologies, published clinical protocols or research papers.

Observations particularly relevant to this condition.

Medications particularly relevant for this condition.

An observation that suggests that this condition applies.

Appropriate team for this condition.

Questionnaire for this condition.

Plan that is appropriate.

A definition of a condition and information relevant to managing it.

The logical id of the resource, as used in the URL for the resource. Once assigned, this value never changes.

Within the context of the FHIR RESTful interactions, the resource has an id except for cases like the create and conditional update. Otherwise, the use of the resouce id depends on the given use case.

The metadata about the resource. This is content that is maintained by the infrastructure. Changes to the content might not always be associated with version changes to the resource.

A reference to a set of rules that were followed when the resource was constructed, and which must be understood when processing the content. Often, this is a reference to an implementation guide that defines the special rules along with other profiles etc.

Asserting this rule set restricts the content to be only understood by a limited set of trading partners. This inherently limits the usefulness of the data in the long term. However, the existing health eco-system is highly fractured, and not yet ready to define, collect, and exchange data in a generally computable sense. Wherever possible, implementers and/or specification writers should avoid using this element. Often, when used, the URL is a reference to an implementation guide that defines these special rules as part of its narrative along with other profiles, value sets, etc.

The base language in which the resource is written.

Language is provided to support indexing and accessibility (typically, services such as text to speech use the language tag). The html language tag in the narrative applies to the narrative. The language tag on the resource may be used to specify the language of other presentations generated from the data in the resource. Not all the content has to be in the base language. The Resource.language should not be assumed to apply to the narrative automatically. If a language is specified, it should it also be specified on the div element in the html (see rules in HTML5 for information about the relationship between xml:lang and the html lang attribute).

IETF language tag for a human language

A human-readable narrative that contains a summary of the resource and can be used to represent the content of the resource to a human. The narrative need not encode all the structured data, but is required to contain sufficient detail to make it "clinically safe" for a human to just read the narrative. Resource definitions may define what content should be represented in the narrative to ensure clinical safety.

Contained resources do not have a narrative. Resources that are not contained SHOULD have a narrative. In some cases, a resource may only have text with little or no additional discrete data (as long as all minOccurs=1 elements are satisfied). This may be necessary for data from legacy systems where information is captured as a "text blob" or where text is additionally entered raw or narrated and encoded information is added later.

These resources do not have an independent existence apart from the resource that contains them - they cannot be identified independently, nor can they have their own independent transaction scope. This is allowed to be a Parameters resource if and only if it is referenced by a resource that provides context/meaning.

This should never be done when the content can be identified properly, as once identification is lost, it is extremely difficult (and context dependent) to restore it again. Contained resources may have profiles and tags in their meta elements, but SHALL NOT have security labels.

May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the resource. To make the use of extensions safe and managable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer can define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension.

There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.

May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the resource and that modifies the understanding of the element that contains it and/or the understanding of the containing element's descendants. Usually modifier elements provide negation or qualification. To make the use of extensions safe and managable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer is allowed to define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension. Applications processing a resource are required to check for modifier extensions.

Modifier extensions SHALL NOT change the meaning of any elements on Resource or DomainResource (including cannot change the meaning of modifierExtension itself).

There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.

Modifier extensions allow for extensions that cannot be safely ignored to be clearly distinguished from the vast majority of extensions which can be safely ignored. This promotes interoperability by eliminating the need for implementers to prohibit the presence of extensions. For further information, see the definition of modifier extensions.

An absolute URI that is used to identify this condition definition when it is referenced in a specification, model, design or an instance; also called its canonical identifier. This SHOULD be globally unique and SHOULD be a literal address at which an authoritative instance of this condition definition is (or will be) published. This URL can be the target of a canonical reference. It SHALL remain the same when the condition definition is stored on different servers.

Can be a urn:uuid: or a urn:oid: but real http: addresses are preferred. Multiple instances may share the same URL if they have a distinct version.

The determination of when to create a new version of a resource (same url, new version) vs. defining a new artifact is up to the author. Considerations for making this decision are found in Technical and Business Versions.

In some cases, the resource can no longer be found at the stated url, but the url itself cannot change. Implementations can use the meta.source element to indicate where the current master source of the resource can be found.

Allows the condition definition to be referenced by a single globally unique identifier.

A formal identifier that is used to identify this condition definition when it is represented in other formats, or referenced in a specification, model, design or an instance.

Typically, this is used for identifiers that can go in an HL7 V3 II (instance identifier) data type, and can then identify this condition definition outside of FHIR, where it is not possible to use the logical URI.

Allows externally provided and/or usable business identifiers to be easily associated with the module.

The identifier that is used to identify this version of the condition definition when it is referenced in a specification, model, design or instance. This is an arbitrary value managed by the condition definition author and is not expected to be globally unique. For example, it might be a timestamp (e.g. yyyymmdd) if a managed version is not available. There is also no expectation that versions can be placed in a lexicographical sequence.

There may be different condition definition instances that have the same identifier but different versions. The version can be appended to the url in a reference to allow a reference to a particular business version of the condition definition with the format [url]|[version]. The version SHOULD NOT contain a '#' - see Business Version.

Indicates the mechanism used to compare versions to determine which is more current.

If set as a string, this is a FHIRPath expression that has two additional context variables passed in - %version1 and %version2 and will return a negative number if version1 is newer, a positive number if version2 and a 0 if the version ordering can't be successfully be determined.

A natural language name identifying the condition definition. This name should be usable as an identifier for the module by machine processing applications such as code generation.

The name is not expected to be globally unique. The name should be a simple alphanumeric type name to ensure that it is machine-processing friendly.

Support human navigation and code generation.

A short, descriptive, user-friendly title for the condition definition.

This name does not need to be machine-processing friendly and may contain punctuation, white-space, etc.

An explanatory or alternate title for the event definition giving additional information about its content.

The status of this condition definition. Enables tracking the life-cycle of the content.

Allows filtering of condition definitions that are appropriate for use versus not.

See guidance around (not) making local changes to elements here.

The lifecycle status of an artifact.

A Boolean value to indicate that this condition definition is authored for testing purposes (or education/evaluation/marketing) and is not intended to be used for genuine usage.

Allows filtering of condition definitions that are appropriate for use versus not.

Enables experimental content to be developed following the same lifecycle that would be used for a production-level condition definition.

The date (and optionally time) when the condition definition was last significantly changed. The date must change when the business version changes and it must change if the status code changes. In addition, it should change when the substantive content of the condition definition changes.

The date is often not tracked until the resource is published, but may be present on draft content. Note that this is not the same as the resource last-modified-date, since the resource may be a secondary representation of the condition definition. Additional specific dates may be added as extensions or be found by consulting Provenances associated with past versions of the resource.

See guidance around (not) making local changes to elements here.

The name of the organization or individual responsible for the release and ongoing maintenance of the condition definition.

Usually an organization but may be an individual. The publisher (or steward) of the condition definition is the organization or individual primarily responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of the condition definition. This is not necessarily the same individual or organization that developed and initially authored the content. The publisher is the primary point of contact for questions or issues with the condition definition. This item SHOULD be populated unless the information is available from context.

Helps establish the "authority/credibility" of the condition definition. May also allow for contact.

Contact details to assist a user in finding and communicating with the publisher.

May be a web site, an email address, a telephone number, etc.

See guidance around (not) making local changes to elements here.

A free text natural language description of the condition definition from a consumer's perspective.

This description can be used to capture details such as comments about misuse, instructions for clinical use and interpretation, literature references, examples from the paper world, etc. It is not a rendering of the condition definition as conveyed in the 'text' field of the resource itself. This item SHOULD be populated unless the information is available from context (e.g. the language of the condition definition is presumed to be the predominant language in the place the condition definition was created).

The content was developed with a focus and intent of supporting the contexts that are listed. These contexts may be general categories (gender, age, ...) or may be references to specific programs (insurance plans, studies, ...) and may be used to assist with indexing and searching for appropriate condition definition instances.

When multiple useContexts are specified, there is no expectation that all or any of the contexts apply.

Assist in searching for appropriate content.

Unique id for the element within a resource (for internal references). This may be any string value that does not contain spaces.

May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the element. To make the use of extensions safe and managable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer can define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension.

There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.

A code that identifies the type of context being specified by this usage context.

A code that specifies a type of context being specified by a usage context.

A value that defines the context specified in this context of use. The interpretation of the value is defined by the code.

A legal or geographic region in which the condition definition is intended to be used.

It may be possible for the condition definition to be used in jurisdictions other than those for which it was originally designed or intended.

DEPRECATION NOTE: For consistency, implementations are encouraged to migrate to using the new 'jurisdiction' code in the useContext element. (I.e. useContext.code indicating http://terminology.hl7.org/CodeSystem/usage-context-type#jurisdiction and useContext.valueCodeableConcept indicating the jurisdiction.)

Countries and regions within which this artifact is targeted for use.

Identification of the condition, problem or diagnosis.

0..1 to account for primarily narrative only resources.

Unique id for the element within a resource (for internal references). This may be any string value that does not contain spaces.

May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the element. To make the use of extensions safe and managable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer can define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension.

There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.

A reference to a code defined by a terminology system.

Codes may be defined very casually in enumerations, or code lists, up to very formal definitions such as SNOMED CT - see the HL7 v3 Core Principles for more information. Ordering of codings is undefined and SHALL NOT be used to infer meaning. Generally, at most only one of the coding values will be labeled as UserSelected = true.

Allows for alternative encodings within a code system, and translations to other code systems.

Unique id for the element within a resource (for internal references). This may be any string value that does not contain spaces.

May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the element. To make the use of extensions safe and managable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer can define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension.

There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.

The identification of the code system that defines the meaning of the symbol in the code.

The URI may be an OID (urn:oid:...) or a UUID (urn:uuid:...). OIDs and UUIDs SHALL be references to the HL7 OID registry. Otherwise, the URI should come from HL7's list of FHIR defined special URIs or it should be an absolute reference to some definition that establishes the system clearly and unambiguously.

Need to be unambiguous about the source of the definition of the symbol.

The version of the code system which was used when choosing this code. Note that a well-maintained code system does not need the version reported, because the meaning of codes is consistent across versions. However this cannot consistently be assured, and when the meaning is not guaranteed to be consistent, the version SHOULD be exchanged.

Where the terminology does not clearly define what string should be used to identify code system versions, the recommendation is to use the date (expressed in FHIR date format) on which that version was officially published as the version date.

A symbol in syntax defined by the system. The symbol may be a predefined code or an expression in a syntax defined by the coding system (e.g. post-coordination).

Need to refer to a particular code in the system.

A representation of the meaning of the code in the system, following the rules of the system.

Need to be able to carry a human-readable meaning of the code for readers that do not know the system.

Indicates that this coding was chosen by a user directly - e.g. off a pick list of available items (codes or displays).

Amongst a set of alternatives, a directly chosen code is the most appropriate starting point for new translations. There is some ambiguity about what exactly 'directly chosen' implies, and trading partner agreement may be needed to clarify the use of this element and its consequences more completely.

This has been identified as a clinical safety criterium - that this exact system/code pair was chosen explicitly, rather than inferred by the system based on some rules or language processing.

A human language representation of the concept as seen/selected/uttered by the user who entered the data and/or which represents the intended meaning of the user.

Very often the text is the same as a displayName of one of the codings.

The codes from the terminologies do not always capture the correct meaning with all the nuances of the human using them, or sometimes there is no appropriate code at all. In these cases, the text is used to capture the full meaning of the source.

A subjective assessment of the severity of the condition as evaluated by the clinician.

Coding of the severity with a terminology is preferred, where possible.

A subjective assessment of the severity of the condition as evaluated by the clinician.

The anatomical location where this condition manifests itself.

Only used if not implicit in code found in ConditionDefinition.code. If the use case requires attributes from the BodySite resource (e.g. to identify and track separately) then use the standard extension http://hl7.org/fhir/StructureDefinition/bodySite. May be a summary code, or a reference to a very precise definition of the location, or both.

SNOMED CT Body site concepts

Clinical stage or grade of a condition. May include formal severity assessments.

Codes describing condition stages (e.g. Cancer stages).

Whether Severity is appropriate to collect for this condition.

Whether bodySite is appropriate to collect for this condition.

Whether stage is appropriate to collect for this condition.

Formal definitions of the condition. These may be references to ontologies, published clinical protocols or research papers.

Observations particularly relevant to this condition.

Medications particularly relevant for this condition.

An observation that suggests that this condition applies.

Appropriate team for this condition.

Questionnaire for this condition.

Plan that is appropriate.