Are DV_TIME_SPECIFICATION classes used on implementations or supported by modeling tools?

For the conformance data validation test cases I have some test cases pending for DV_GENERAL_TIME_SPECIFICATION and DV_PERIODIC_TIME_SPECIFICATION classes from Data Types Information Model

But I’m not sure if those classes are really used or not (like DV_PARAGRAPH) in the real world. So I don’t want to create test cases for something nobody implements.


As far as I know, no-one uses them, and they would be a candidate for replacement if we can prove this. However, we need to describe in the specs what they are replaced with.

EDIT: let me add a bit to that. The primary requirement being met by these classes was intended to be the ability to state a future time ‘formula’ for e.g. prescription medication, i.e. things like 3 times a day with meals.

The GTS approach was to do it syntactically. Today, it is done with an archetyped data structure (currently CLUSTER.therapeutic_direction), so it’s not even in the reference model. There is also a field in INSTRUCTION.medication_order called Parsable directions, which is used to pick up ‘legacy’ medical syntax like ‘3td po’ (3 times/day per oral).

However, the need to express future times also exists in Task Planning, and having a Foundation type that could do the job would be useful. At the moment there is TIME_SPECIFIER.

1 Like