LRI+Vocab+IG+HL7+Tables+Discussion

include component="page" wikiName="siframework" page="LRI Header" As we complete the analysis for the new LRI IG, we will be referring to the base HL7 standard for optional fields, and only identifying exceptions that may not have base standard guidance. In addition, we are looking for recommendations for HL7 tables that currently have no suggested values (are blank). However, we recognize that some HL7 value set tables, while optional or empty, may have specific constraints in the US Realm due to legislation or regulation, e.g., specific value sets for ethnicity codes as defined by Meaningful Use Stage I. We are asking all members of the community to assist us in identifying any other tables that may have a similar constraint imposed outside of HL7 or the work of the S&I committee to date.

Using the [|IG Vocabulary Variance Analysis document] as a reference, participants are asked to identify tables/fields that may be similarly constrained so we can make the proper notation in the new guide. If you have suggestions for values for other blank sets, please also let us know those.

Due to the extremely tight production schedule, any input to be considered in the first iteration of the Implementation Guide must be submitted **prior to COB Tuesday August 30th.**

To create your comment, click the **Edit** button in the upper right hand corner of the page. Fill in your name, organization, and suggestion, and click the Save button.

Comments Table

 * = **Workgroup Member** ||= **Organization** ||= **Suggestion** ||
 * Cindy Johns || LabCorp || Reviewed HL7 tables with data fields designated as R, RE, C and CE and all have been included in the Vocab workgroup's recommendations in the Consensus Statement document. Do not have any recommendations at this time for adding values to tables designated as Optional that do not have suggested values. ||

include component="page" wikiName="siframework" page="space.template.inc_contentleft_end"