# Referring to demographic entities in data
**URL:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/referring-to-demographic-entities-in-data/2659
**Category:** Entity/demographics
**Created:** [27 May 2022 12:47 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/referring-to-demographic-entities-in-data/2659 "2022-05-27T12:47:24Z")
**Posts on this page:** 2
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@thomas.beale](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/thomas.beale)
#### Post date: [27 May 2022 12:47 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/referring-to-demographic-entities-in-data/2659/1 "2022-05-27T12:47:24Z")
We have various conversations going on around demographic data. I think we may have to look at a modification to the RM that would support a need that @ian.mcnicoll and @heather.leslie have long been asking for (and it’s in a thread here that I can’t put my finger on right now).
So, to put it in context, there are two potential types of demographic ‘reference’.
- One is what we support, which is references (via `PARTICIPATION`, in `ENTRY.other_participations`, `COMPOSITION.participations`, and in all the fixed attributes like `ENTRY.subject`, `COMPOSITION.composer` etc)
- the other is when _future involvement_ of some parties (normally clinicians, but could be someone else) is specified. We have this in [Task Planning](https://specifications.openehr.org/releases/UML/latest/index.html#Diagrams___18_2_83e026d_1484067307154_574484_4868) (`TASK_PARTICIPATION`), but of course that’s outside the openEHR RM.
@ian.mcnicoll has mentioned various times in the past that he would like a way to make Participation a data type, so that it could be included in data that is about things in the future. I don’t think making it a data type is a good idea from a formal point of view (it will create issues in software), but the intention is right, and I think we will need to do something about it. The simplest way I can see is to add a new kind of `ELEMENT` (call it `PARTICIPATION_ELEMENT` for now) to the [data structures part of the RM](https://specifications.openehr.org/releases/UML/latest/index.html#Diagrams___18_1_83e026d_1433773264427_531476_6966).
Doing this would allow `PARTICIPATION_ELEMENT` to be freely mixed in anywhere you can currently put `ELEMENTs`. I don’t see null flavour as being needed, because this kind of data is always prospective (i.e. _a priori_), not collected _a posteriori_.
Thoughts? If anyone can find the previous discussion about ‘participations as data types’ that would be useful too.
---
### Author:  [@sebastian.iancu](https://discourse.openehr.org/u/sebastian.iancu)
#### Post date: [27 May 2022 20:01 UTC](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/referring-to-demographic-entities-in-data/2659/2 "2022-05-27T20:01:09Z")
> [@thomas.beale](#):
>
> If anyone can find the previous discussion about ‘participations as data types’ that would be useful too.
Are you looking for this [PARTY data in EHR space](https://discourse.openehr.org/t/party-data-in-ehr-space/985) ? (more like a summary)