Pcd-example-notLabs.xml

ConsentDirective Example (id = "pcd-example-notLabs")

<Contract xmlns="http://hl7.org/fhir"><id value="pcd-example-notLabs"/><text ><status value="generated"/><div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">The following scenario is based on existing jurisdictional policy and are realized in
 existing systems in Canada. 
 The default policy is one of implied consent for the provision of care, so these scenarios
 all deal with withdrawal or withholding consent for that purpose. 
 In other jurisdictions, where an express consent model is used (Opt-In), these would
 examples would contain the phrase &quot;consent to&quot; rather 
 than &quot;withhold&quot; or &quot;withdraw&quot; consent for.
 <p >
 specific to use-case 1. Withhold or withdraw consent for disclosure of records related
 to specific domain (e.g. DI, LAB, etc.)
 </p><p >
 Patient &quot;P. van de Heuvel&quot; wishes to withhold disclosure of all of her lab
 orders and results to any provider. 
 </p></div></text><issued value="2014年08月17日"/><!-- not bound by a timeframe - Contract.applies --><subject ><referencevalue="Patient/f001 "/><displayvalue="P. van de Heuvel"/></subject><!-- I assume the example given is Canada Infoway wide??? AND I assume it is desired to
 state that in the Contract.authority element --><authority ><referencevalue="Organization/Infoway"/><displayvalue="Canada Infoway"/></authority><!-- and/or would this [also] go into Contract.domain as a Jurisdiction?? (see the example
 on UK Pharamacy Juristiction) --><domain ><referencevalue="Location/Infoway"/><displayvalue="Canada Infoway"/></domain><type ><coding ><system value="http://loinc.org"/><code value="57016-8"/></coding></type><!-- made up code-system to represent the set of privacy consent sub-types known and published
 by Canada Infoway --><subType ><coding ><system value="http://www.infoway-inforoute.ca.org/Consent-subtype-codes"/><code value="Opt-In"/><display value="Default Authorization with exceptions."/></coding></subType><!-- I can easily say to exclude a type of FHIR Resource, but lab-orders is not a direct
 Resource type. Might we put in FHIR based query parameters? --><term ><type ><coding ><!-- made up code system --><system value="http://example.org/fhir/consent-term-type-codes"/><code value="withhold-object-type"/></coding></type><subType ><coding ><system value="http://hl7.org/fhir/resource-types"/><code value="ProcedureRequest"/></coding></subType><!-- by not specifying term.actor I assume this means everyone? --><text value="Withhold orders from any provider."/></term><term ><type ><coding ><!-- made up code system --><system value="http://example.org/fhir/consent-term-type-codes"/><code value="withhold-object-type"/></coding></type><subType ><coding ><system value="http://hl7.org/fhir/resource-types"/><code value="DiagnosticReport"/></coding></subType><!-- by not specifying term.actor I assume this means everyone? --><text value="Withhold order results from any provider."/></term><!-- the terms of the consent in friendly consumer speak --><friendly ><contentAttachment ><titlevalue="The terms of the consent in friendly consumer speak."/><!-- likely use url pointer to common text --></contentAttachment></friendly><!-- the legal terms of the consent in lawyer speak --><legal ><contentAttachment ><titlevalue="The terms of the consent in lawyer speak."/><!-- likely use url pointer to common text --><!-- I think some think that this should be the pointer to the law by which this consent
 is derived under. Such as http://lois-laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/P-21/index.html --></contentAttachment></legal></Contract>