Hi all, We have noticed that when persisting archetypes of type EVALUATION, there is an option to persist an attribute called ‘time asserted’. We know that some time ago there was a request to include this attribute as part of all evaluations. However, in the current specifications we cannot find …

[image] tarabonet: when persisting archetypes of type EVALUATION, there is an option to persist an attribute called ‘time asserted’. where is that persistence? I’m not sure what tools are you using.

I think Tara is talking about this conversation. The last message suggest that this was already accepted in the SEC in October 2024: [image] RM Change request: Add time_asserted to EVALUATION class? Clinical During today’s SEC meeting, I asked for this issue t…

It was indeed discussed in the past and decided to be added to EVALUATION - see Jira . This is not yet formally released (in the specification RM 1.2.0), but it could be that is already implemented on the vendor side.

[image] tarabonet: We have noticed that when persisting archetypes of type EVALUATION, there is an option to persist an attribute called ‘time asserted’. @damoca this is saying she is actually persisting something, just need the connect to understand what she’s doing. I know about the convers…

Hello, this is exactly what I mean. We are using EHRBase and have seen that this attribute can already be persisted in this type of archetypes. However, when we checked the OpenEHR specifications, we couldn’t find any information about it.

It could happen that an implementer goes ahead the updates of the spec. IIRC that change was agreed by the SEC, @sebastian.iancu might now better, though we need to wait for a spec release to have it written in stone. There is nothing wrong with the software going ahead of the spec, though if some…

@tarabonet taraboneti suspect you are just seeing that some evaluation archetypes have a date last updated or data asserted element but the are added to the archetypes individually not part of the underlying RM. However we recognised that it would be better if date asserted was added to the RM EVAL…

time asserted already implemented in EVALUATION RM

Specifications RM

damoca (David Moner) 4 March 2026 08:06 3

I think Tara is talking about this conversation. The last message suggest that this was already accepted in the SEC in October 2024:

Topic		Replies	Views
RM Change request: Add time_asserted to EVALUATION class? Clinical rm , archetype	24	928	14 October 2024
Strange use of 'offset' as a settable RM attribute Technical (archive)	13	67	17 February 2016
Timing in the real world, openEHR and FHIR Clinical fhir , time	23	1553	27 May 2020
Inconsistency in REST API Create EHR implementations -needs spec clarification? ITS	27	968	9 October 2024
Does the data_types in Better's Archetype Designer include the 'time_specification'? Archetype Designer datatypes	15	739	8 August 2023
Questions about the assertion process Specifications attestation	2	78	6 October 2025
Question about paths to C_SINGLE_ATTRIBUTE alternatives Clinical (archive)	7	46	23 November 2016
Rich text format in DV_TEXT Technical (archive)	19	68	24 September 2013
ADL date of publication Implementation	18	254	3 January 2025
[EHRbase] Storing and querying data without an standalone archetype Platform ehrbase , aql	38	1150	17 April 2024

time asserted already implemented in EVALUATION RM

Related topics