International Patient Summary (IPS)

Your browser does not appear to support JavaScript. You may want to try one of the following:

Turn on JavaScript in your browser if it supports it.
Use a browser that supports JavaScript.
Try a JavaScript-free version of this page, if made available by the application author.

An error has occurred

You may want to try one of the following:

Close this dialog and continue to use this page.
Reload this page. Note that you will lose any unsaved changes.
If the above does not work, try reloading the page yourself. Note that you will lose any unsaved changes:
- With Firefox: hold down the shift key and click the Reload button in your browser toolbar.
- With Safari and Chrome: click the Reload button in your browser toolbar.
- With Internet Explorer: hold down the control key and click the Reload button in your browser toolbar.
Return home.

Reloading form

This form has to be reloaded. This most likely happened because your session has expired, which might take to the login page. (If you think that you shouldn't see this message and that the problem persists, please contact support.)

Help

$xforms-template-label$$xforms-template-help$$xforms-template-hint$$xforms-template-label$$xforms-template-help$$xforms-template-hint$ en-US

International Patient Summary (IPS) - Value Sets

- Ärztliche Leistungsanforderung
- CDA-CH-RESP - Emergency Service Protocol
- Elektronischer Impfpass
- Medikationsmanagement
- British Columbia CDA Project
- CDA R2 Standard
- Continuity of Care Document (CCD)
- International Patient Summary (IPS)
- Polish National Implementation of HL7 CDA
- HL7.de Sandbox
- Development
Project
Datasets
Scenarios
Terminology
Templates
Issues
Login
- English (en-US)

url-scheme

Valueset locked

Value Sets (External repositories)

/
-


	true50
Value Sets

Language Code –

false

History (1)

Date	Author	Status	Type
2018-11-05 14:11:31	Giorgio Cangioli	Draft	version

false

Issues (3)

false

Change Request Status = Closed ( hl7ips-issue-42 ): ietf3066 vs ietf5646

Type

Change Request

Status

Change Request Status = Closed

Priority

Normal

Events

Tracking / Status = Closed

2017-05-10 17:44:10 : Tracking by Giorgio Cangioli

Tracking / Status = In Progress

2017-05-03 18:06:55 : Tracking by Giorgio Cangioli

Assignment

2017-05-03 17:59:08 : Assigned To Giorgio Cangioli by Giorgio Cangioli

Tracking / Status = Open	2017-05-03 17:57:11 : Tracking by Giorgio Cangioli
Description	Christof there is an oid that could be used for saying the last IEFT RFC language version. To be verify if there is a way to refer the IEFT RFC indipendently by the RFC version Use the BCP 47 . Decision refer the full BCP 47 .

Tracking / Status = Open	2017-05-02 11:23:13 : Tracking by Giorgio Cangioli
Description	Finding: The CDA standard refers to RFC 3066; the currently active RFC is 5646. [1] should we leave the reference to the superseeded vocabulary ? - Further explanation: -

Request for Information/Education Status = Deferred ( hl7ips-issue-43 ): Check BCP 47 OID

Type

Request for Information/Education

Status

Request for Information/Education Status = Deferred

Priority

Lowest

Current Labels

(Vocab) Vocabularies

Events

Tracking / Status = Deferred

2020-05-27 17:53:42 : Tracking by Giorgio Cangioli

Vocab

Tracking / Status = In Progress	2017-05-10 17:42:10 : Tracking by Giorgio Cangioli Vocab
Description	Value set definition updated. To be checked if the OID used is correct. (for this reason the name of the issue has been updated)

Tracking / Status = In Progress

2017-05-10 17:30:05 : Tracking by Giorgio Cangioli

Vocab

Tracking / Status = In Progress	2017-05-03 18:07:54 : Tracking by Giorgio Cangioli Vocab
Description	In the discussion made during the may 3rd call it was agreed to define the value set referring to the complete BCP 47 and not to a specific IETF "version" . Leaving to external rule the application to further constraints to all the possibile combination allowed by this code system. (to be check if the right OID is actually 1.3.6.1.2.1.165)

Tracking / Status = Open	2017-05-03 16:49:41 : Tracking by Giorgio Cangioli
Description	The title of the issue has been changed from "The language value set is the full ietf ?" to "define the content of the language value set". The original question was related to the "HumanLanguage" value set defined as th full 3066 code systems. To be agreed if a selection of language code has to be applied.

Tracking / Status = Open	2017-05-02 11:24:07 : Tracking by Giorgio Cangioli
Description	Finding: IETF allows for : it; en-US; be-cyrl; en-gb-oed (Britain English with oxford spelling) and so on Should we restrict the value set to specific values (e.g. en-US; fr-FR;...) ? Suggestion: - Further explanation: -

Change Request Status = Feedback needed ( hl7ips-issue-147 ): Evaluate to use 2.16.840.1.113883.4.642.3.20

Type

Change Request

Status

Change Request Status = Feedback needed

Priority

Normal

Events

Tracking / Status = Feedback needed	2020-01-29 11:47:03 : Tracking by Giorgio Cangioli
Description	Added as STU comment

Tracking / Status = Open	2018-11-05 15:06:16 : Tracking by Giorgio Cangioli
Description	Finding: FHIR uses the http://hl7.org/fhir/ValueSet/languages value set (2.16.840.1.113883.4.642.3.20) Suggestion: Consider to use that and not the IPS-specified value set Further explanation: -

false

Usage (…)

Retrieving…

About/Legal