This
page
is
part
of
the
FHIR
Specification
(v5.0.0:
R5
-
STU
v6.0.0-ballot2:
Release
6
Ballot
(2nd
Draft)
(see
Ballot
Notes
).
This
is
the
The
current
published
version
in
it's
permanent
home
(it
will
always
be
available
at
this
URL).
is
5.0.0
.
For
a
full
list
of
available
versions,
see
the
Directory
of
published
versions
.
Page
versions:
R5
R4B
R4
Work
Group
Clinical
Decision
Support
|
Maturity Level : 2 | Standards Status : Trial Use |
There are many kinds of supporting documentation that can be provided with clinical quality improvement artifacts, from detailed documentation, to references to the guidelines from which artifacts are derived, to grades and scores indicating quality of evidence or the strength of a recommendation.
The
relatedArtifact
element
present
on
the
Clinical
Reasoning
Module
artifacts
allows
supporting
documentation
to
be
provided,
either
in
the
form
of
a
reference
to
a
resource,
such
as
a
DocumentReference,
or
as
a
reference
to
external
content
as
an
Attachment.
This
same
mechanism
can
be
used
to
attach
supporting
documentation
to
the
actionDefinition
elements
of
a
PlanDefinition,
allowing
supporting
documentation
for
specific
steps
in
a
rule
or
protocol,
as
well
as
to
the
action
elements
of
a
RequestOrchestration
to
provide
supporting
documentation
for
individual
recommendations
as
part
of
the
result
of
a
decision
support
evaluation.
<documentation>
<type value="justification"/>
<document>
<extension url="http://hl7.org/fhir/StructureDefinition/cqf-qualityOfEvidence">
<valueCodeableConcept>
<coding>
<system value="http://terminology.hl7.org/CodeSystem/evidence-quality"/>
<code value="high"/>
</coding>
<text value="High Quality"/>
</valueCodeableConcept>
</extension>
<contentType value="text/html"/>
<url value="http://psychiatryonline.org/pb/assets/raw/sitewide/practice_guidelines/guidelines/mdd.pdf"/>
<title value="Practice Guideline for the Treatment of Patients with Major Depressive Disorder"/>
</document>
</documentation>
In all these cases, the qualityOfEvidence and strengthOfRecommendation extensions can be used to grade the information being provided. For example, the qualityOfEvidence extension can be attached to a DocumentReference to indicate a rating for the quality of the evidence represented in the document. Similarly, a strengthOfRecommendation extension can be attached to the action element of a RequestOrchestration to indicate the strength of the recommendation being made.
These
extensions
are
bound
to
example
valuesets
based
on
the
GRADE
rating
systems
for
quality
of
evidence
and
strength
of
recommendation.
Other
rating
systems
could
be
used
by
defining
the
appropriate
valuesets
and
profiles
to
make
use
of
them.