A finding from the Swedish openEHR work is that the general usefulness of the attribute “setting” of EVENT_CONTEXT (see diagram below) and the choices available in associated terminology (see XML below) feel a bit too country/organisation specific (and old) to be mandatory in the RM in current form. …

Completely agree. I make little use of this - the boundaries are increasingly blurred. Generally set it to ‘other care’. I would make it optional and also open for other terminologies e.g SNOMED or national coding systems

I also agree (and very recently asked @ian.mcnicoll about it). I think its a nearly unique case in the specifications where we are forced to use a kind of classification with no obvious origin. A related topic would be, as it has been discussed at some point, to clearly define if that terminology c…

Just looking at the value set I have to say I would have thought just the simple split of (say) primary care hospital in-patient hospital out-patient specialist clinic ambulance community (including aged care) or even just primary / hospital / other would be more useful. Then you can find out sim…

THat’s not wrong but there will often be other ‘not wrong’ splits applied locally and this is not terribly interoperable, as it is heavily dependent on the healthcare economy. It also conflicts/collides a bit with XDS type metadata. So I would both make optional and make the termset an example.

[image] thomas.beale: Then you can find out simple things like what procedures were delivered by hospitals that could have been delivered in general practice or somewhere else. If that is the main known use case I believe we’d get better granularity and flexibility for such questions by deriv…

[image] erik.sundvall: Could/should setting be made optional in a future RM release? What do people from other countries think of the current alternatives in the terminology? In what kind of applications/use-cases is the “setting” variable used and useful today? How well would they work if “set…

Hi! Do we have any PR/CR for… …making the EVENT_CONTEXT.setting optional… …and open to any codes … …as discussed above? I only found the PR [SPECPR-382] - openEHR JIRA and the related CR [SPECTERM-20] - openEHR JIRA that requested an addition of “mental healthcare” to the list, but I may have …

Hi Erik, I did raise this at a SEC meeting - I think there are a whole host of places in the RM e.g. setting or Normal_status in Quantity, where we either need ot be more pro-active in updating the ‘official codes’ or IMO better still makes these ‘examples’ in FHIR binding terms. I did actually g…

[image] erik.sundvall: …making the EVENT_CONTEXT.setting optional… …and open to any codes … #1 is the most important. I wonder if both #1 and #2 non-breaking changes that can go in to a minor release of the specifications? In the sense that data coded as today in existing EHRs will still …

@ian.mcnicoll did you find any CR/PR or other things regarding this? Or should we try to create a PR at Specification PR tracker - Issues - openEHR JIRA ?

Should EVENT_CONTEXT.setting be made optional and/or it's associated terminology updated?

Specifications RM

MattijsK (Mattijs Kuhlmann) 13 February 2024 12:16 13

We are currently looking into using EVENT_CONTEXT, and the setting being optional would make sense to us and also make our life easier.

It seems like everyone in this topic agrees to make it optional, so we also think we should create a PR for this.

Topic		Replies	Views
Svensk tillämpning av Setting openEHR.se	12	3129	28 November 2023
Custom terminology for 'mode' in participation class Terminology	4	94	2 December 2024
Where to put organisational levels that do not fit within health_care_facility Platform	9	934	23 June 2022
SpO2 scale 2 decision Clinical archetype	33	1119	19 November 2025
"Times of the day" vocabulary? Ask IEB	14	474	2 July 2024
Use of RM:provider Technical (archive)	8	43	18 January 2017
Versioning of archetypes: Minor or major changes? Implementers (archive)	3	22	17 November 2017
SPECRM-89 - support for 'episodic' category RM rm , release-110	12	749	28 February 2022
ADL2 valuesets - extend beyond 'local' terms ADL adl , archetype	12	691	14 May 2020
DV_CODED_TEXT with open/extensible set of codes (value set) ADL archetype , terminology , modelling-patterns , template , adl	29	1686	3 April 2020

Should EVENT_CONTEXT.setting be made optional and/or it's associated terminology updated?

Related topics