STU 3 Candidate

This page is part of the FHIR Specification (v1.4.0: STU 3 Ballot 3). The current version which supercedes this version is 5.0.0. For a full list of available versions, see the Directory of published versions . Page versions: R4B R4 R3

1.30.1.11.9 Code System http://hl7.org/fhir/concept-map-equivalence

This is a value set defined by the FHIR project.

Summary

Defining URL:

http://hl7.org/fhir/concept-map-equivalence

Name:

ConceptMapEquivalence

Definition:

The degree of equivalence between concepts.

Committee:

FHIR Infrastructure

Work Group

OID:

2.16.840.1.113883.4.642.1.9 (for OID based terminology systems)

Source Resource

XML / JSON

This Code system is used in the following value sets:

ConceptMapEquivalence (The degree of equivalence between concepts.)

1.30.1.11.9.1 Content

1.30.1.11.9.2 ConceptMapEquivalence

The degree of equivalence between concepts.

This code system http://hl7.org/fhir/concept-map-equivalence defines the following codes:

Lvl	Code	Display	Definition
1	equivalent	Equivalent	The definitions of the concepts mean the same thing (including when structural implications of meaning are considered) (i.e. extensionally identical).
2	equal	Equal	The definitions of the concepts are exactly the same (i.e. only grammatical differences) and structural implications of meaning are identical or irrelevant (i.e. intentionally identical).
1	wider	Wider	The target mapping is wider in meaning than the source concept.
1	subsumes	Subsumes	The target mapping subsumes the meaning of the source concept (e.g. the source is-a target).
1	narrower	Narrower	The target mapping is narrower in meaning that the source concept. The sense in which the mapping is narrower SHALL be described in the comments in this case, and applications should be careful when attempting to use these mappings operationally.
1	specializes	Specializes	The target mapping specializes the meaning of the source concept (e.g. the target is-a source).
1	inexact	Inexact	The target mapping overlaps with the source concept, but both source and target cover additional meaning, or the definitions are imprecise and it is uncertain whether they have the same boundaries to their meaning. The sense in which the mapping is narrower SHALL be described in the comments in this case, and applications should be careful when attempting to use these mappings operationally.
1	unmatched	Unmatched	There is no match for this concept in the destination concept system.
2	disjoint	Disjoint	This is an explicit assertion that there is no mapping between the source and target concept.

See the full registry of value sets defined as part of FHIR.

Explanation of the columns that may appear on this page:

Level

A few code lists that FHIR defines are hierarchical - each code is assigned a level. In this scheme, some codes are under other codes, and imply that the code they are under also applies

Source

The source of the definition of the code (when the value set draws in codes defined elsewhere)

Code

The code (used as the code in the resource instance)

Display

The display (used in the display element of a Coding). If there is no display, implementers should not simply display the code, but map the concept into their application

Definition

An explanation of the meaning of the concept

Comments

Additional notes about how to use the code