I am working on importing and exporting CDA health records. From my research i’v found that every CDA has a different format.
I cant find anything specific related to the format of CDA document so that i can create CDA document from the data that is available in my database. I need help in understanding the nodes available in CDA document.
The question you posed is a bit vague because there are alot of variations of cda documents but they do all follow the cda schema
Here is the MDHT java api for CDA https://github.com/mdht/mdht-models/releases/tag/v3.0.1.20170825_Consol2
here is a site with CDA examples
http://hl7-c-cda-examples.herokuapp.com
Related
I am now developing an accounting web application to generate XBRL file then post to a government host web service. Now I have taxonomy prepared and user data ready. What I need is a software which can quickly map those data base on the taxonomy and generate XBRL files. Could anyone provide me some software which can achieve this? Open source is the best that I can implement into my project. Thanks in advance.
XBRL is a broad area, from detailed accounting data (XBRL GL) to summary reports to highly dimensional, data warehouse type content.
Commercially, products like Altova MapForce are really good for mapping from underlying data sources to XBRL taxonomies and creating content.
I assume you have already looked through SourceForge and found tools like Gepsio (https://gepsio.codeplex.com/). Arelle is a great start for people who know Python. (www.arelle.org). And there is a ton of Open Source and XBRL at xbrlwiki.info.
I'm a student and I want to find a search engine for big data. I found MarkLogic Server but I don't know what file types it supports. Does it support doc, docx, pdf, xml, ppt, pptx, etc.? What other types are supported?
At low level, MarkLogic supports storage of xml, plain text, and binary. XML is fully searchable, including range indexes for faceted search. Text is only full-text searchable. Binary is not searchable as is, but there are facilities to extract meta information, and text out of many binary formats. You can find more details about the latter in the online documentation:
http://docs.marklogic.com/guide/search-dev/binary-document-metadata#chapter
There is a sample application that shows this functionality:
http://developer.marklogic.com/code/document-discovery
HTH!
I'm using the Mirth Connect listener and so can receive HL7 XML fine (apparently). I've been asked, though, if I am able to receive CCD messages.
Looking at Wikipedia, "The CCD specification is a constraint on the HL7 Clinical Document Architecture (CDA) standard". To me, that says I can at least receive the message via my normal process. Parsing the message could be something altogether different, though.
Can anyone tell me whether or not I am correct in this reading of the description? Is Mirth going to have any trouble receiving the CCD message/s?
Thanks.
The answer is yes, mostly. Below is an example of how to setup for receiving a CDA Message.
The real issue comes into play depending on how you need to receive the message and what needs to be done with it. CDA and HL7 v3 messaging is not as trivial as HL7 v2 (your typical pipe delimited HL7 message) is. The message structures are highly complex and will require a lot of learning. Additionally, CDA messages are not transferred over the MLLP protocol like HL7 v2. I have generally seen people transferring these messages using the XDS profiles. So, depending on how you need to receive the message, there may some additional work to be done.
I believe the paid/licensed version of Mirth offers some components to aid with CDA/HL7 v3 messages, but it is not included in the OSS version.
Receiving a CDA Message in Mirth
Mirth would have no issue receiving the XML message. Just make sure to set the data type to XML in the channel.
From there, you can setup your receive and destination. If you need to work with the XML of the CDA, in the message transformer make sure to provide a sample CDA in the message templates section. Once you do that, the message should show up in teh Message Trees section.
What Difference HL7 V3 and CDA, really until now I haven't got precise answer
please help me
Thanks.
HLv2.x is messaging protocol which was mostly ascii/text based, and also had an xml support to it. The problem was that HL7v2.x had boundaries for customization to about 20 percent That is why some times HL7 is also referred to as an open standard.
In order to scrap off customization, attain consistency and enable Plug N Play messaging, RIM - Reference Information Model was created. That gave an Object oriented approach to HL7 messaging standard.
Based on RIM, CDA Clinical Document Architecture was developed.If you say you using v3 or CDA both mean the same. v3 message is completely XML based allowing no region for customization unlike v2.7.
UPDATE: This question here also adds more information about the schemas used by v3 and CDA.
Key Differences
HL7 V2
Not “Plug and Play” – it provides 80 percent of the interface and a framework to negotiate the remaining 20 percent on an interface-by-interface basis
Historically built in an ad hoc way because no other standard existed at the time
Generally provides compatibility between 2.X versions
Messaging-based standard built upon pipe and hat encoding
V2 is what most people think of when people say “HL7″
HL7 V3
Approaching “Plug and Play” – less of a “framework for negotiation”
Many decades of effort over ten year period reflecting “best and brightest” thinking
NOT backward compatible with V2
Model-based standard built upon Reference Information Model (RIM) provides consistency across entire standard
Messaging in XML format.
Clinical Document Architecture (CDA) is what most people think of when people say “HL7 V3″
Example
v3
<author>
<time value="200202150730"/>
<modeCode code="WRITTEN"/>
<signatureCode code="S"/>
<assignedEntity>
<id root="2.16.840.1.113883.19.1122.3" extension="444-444-4444"/>
<assignedPerson>
<name>
<given>Harold</given>
<given>H</given>
<family>Hippocrates</family>
<suffix qualifier="AC">MD</suffix>
</name>
</assignedPerson>
</assignedEntity>
v3 is under continous development. Even today, most of the healthcare applications, still continue to use v2.x.
CDA are HL7 documents, while HL7 V.x are messages. Long story short, the CDA aims for human readability AND machine processing while messages only aim for machine processing.
Here's a good link which describes both paradigms.
A CDA is self-contained and static while a HL7 message describes a dynamic action on a object (A08 for example to update a visit's details or A05 to pre-admitt a patient.)
HL7 V.x messages are purely event driven while the content (Such as an OBX-5 field) may contain a static value. We for example used ORU messages to embedd x-ray results as binary stream.
I think you need to be a bit more specific on HL7. Do you mean HL7 V2 or HL7 V3.
CDA is a specific model created using HL7V3 ( and its underlying Reference Information Model ) to represent a clinical document. So in fact CDA is HL7v3, in as much it is an instance of a model created using HL7V3.
From my knowledge of CDA and the wider use of HL7V3, CDA is by far the most successful and widespread use of HL7V3.
CDA is an specification of HL7 v3. V3 is divided in domains, and CDA is like one specific domain for clinical documents. The Reference Information Model (RIM) of v3 is the general model for all v3 based standards, CDA is just one of those standards.
The CDA and HL7 v 3.x are synonymous.
I am trying to find the document that specifies the standard for pthreads. I've seen various links which point to IEEE 1003.1c-1995 (i.e. Wikipedia or OpenGroup). However when I searched for this document on the IEEE standards site I eventually found this page which said "Superseded Standard."
The IEEE page for 1003.1c-1995 did have a note that said: "Abstract not available. See ISO/IEC 9945-1." Searching for that on Google led me to a page for ISO/IEC 9945-1:1996 but the status said "withdrawn."
So my question is what is the current active standard for pthreads? Even better would be if there was a link to a free version of the standard, but it looks like most of the links I've seen for standards cost money. But I figure if I can find out the actual standard then I might try to see if I can access it through my school's library. But first I want to know what document I should be looking for.
I believe you want ISO/IEC/IEEE 9945:2009 as it is newer than ISO/IEC 9945-1:1996 , which was revised ISO/IEC 9945-1:2003 and ISO/IEC/IEEE 9945:2009 revised that.
The following POSIX FAQ provides additional information, specifically relevant Q4. Where can I download the 1003.1 standard from? and includes links to a free HTML online version that requires registration here.
There is understandably a lot of confusion around the relevant standards. We have:
ISO/IEC 9945
IEEE 1003.1
POSIX.1
Single Unix Specification
The Open Group Base Specifications
Possibly others
Why so many different standards? I'm sure it's mostly historical. At one point some or all of these standards might have referred to their own thing. But the simplest answer is that, today, all of these specifications are now just different names for the same thing*. Here is the opening sentence from the online version of The Open Group Base Specifications, Issue 7:
POSIX.1-2008 is simultaneously IEEE Std 1003.1™-2008 and The Open Group Technical Standard Base Specifications, Issue 7
Some of the standards bodies do not provide free or registration-free access to their copies of the standard. However, The Open Group does allow free (and registration-free) access to the current issue of their online copy.
*The Single Unix Specification may not be exactly the same; it seems it contains everything in POSIX, plus the X/Open Curses standard.