STU3 Candidate

This page is part of the FHIR Specification (v1.8.0: STU 3 Draft). 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: R5 R4B R4 R3

Capabilitystatement-phr-example.xml

Raw XML (canonical form)

PHR Example (id = "phr")

<CapabilityStatement xmlns="http://hl7.org/fhir">
  <id value="phr"/>
  <text>
    <status value="generated"/>
    <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
     
      <p>Prototype Capability Statement for September 2013 Connectathon</p>
     
      <p>The server offers read and search support on the following resource types:</p>
     
      <ul>
      
        <li>Patient</li>
      
        <li>DocumentReference</li>
      
        <li>Condition</li>
      
        <li>DiagnosticReport</li>
    
      </ul>
    
    </div>
  </text>
  <name value="PHR Template"/>
  <status value="draft"/>
  <date value="2013-06-18"/>
  <publisher value="FHIR Project"/>
  <contact>
    <telecom>
      <system value="url"/>
      <value value="http://hl7.org/fhir"/>
    </telecom>
  </contact>
  <description value="Prototype Capability Statement for September 2013 Connectathon"/>
  <kind value="capability"/>
  <software>
    <name value="ACME PHR Server"/>
  </software>
<!--    while the FHIR infrastructure is turning over prior to development, a version is required.
   Note that this may be rescinded later    -->
  <fhirVersion value="1.0.0"/>
<!--    this is not particularly important for this usage (server doesn't accept any content),
   but we have to provide it anyway    -->
  <acceptUnknown value="no"/>
<!--   
    for the connectathon, servers should support both xml and json. Clients can use only
   one. 
     -->
  <format value="json"/>
  <format value="xml"/>
  <rest>
    <mode value="server"/>
    <documentation value="Protoype server Capability Statement for September 2013 Connectathon"/>
    <security>
      <service>
        <text value="OAuth"/>
      </service>
      <description value="We recommend that PHR servers use standard OAuth using a          standard 3rd party provider.
       We are not testing the ability to provide an          OAuth authentication/authorization
       service itself, and nor is providing          any security required for the connectathon
       at all"/>
    </security>
    <resource>
    <!--    patient resource: read and search for patients the authenticated user has access too
          -->
      <type value="Patient"/>
      <interaction>
        <code value="read"/>
      </interaction>
      <interaction>
        <code value="search-type"/>
        <documentation value="When a client searches patients with no search criteria, they get a list of all patients
         they have access too. Servers may elect to offer additional search parameters, but this
         is not required"/>
      </interaction>
    </resource>
    <resource>
    <!--    document reference resource: read and search     -->
      <type value="DocumentReference"/>
      <interaction>
        <code value="read"/>
      </interaction>
      <interaction>
        <code value="search-type"/>
      </interaction>
      <searchParam>
        <name value="_id"/>
        <type value="token"/>
        <documentation value="_id parameter always supported. For the connectathon, servers may elect which search parameters
         are supported"/>
      </searchParam>
    </resource>
  <!--    for the purposes of the connectathon, servers can choose which additional resources
     to support. Here's a couple of examples    -->
    <resource>
    <!--    Condition - let the patient see a list of their Conditions    -->
      <type value="Condition"/>
      <interaction>
        <code value="read"/>
      </interaction>
      <interaction>
        <code value="search-type"/>
      </interaction>
      <searchParam>
        <name value="_id"/>
        <type value="token"/>
        <documentation value="Standard _id parameter"/>
      </searchParam>
    </resource>
    <resource>
    <!--    Diagnostic Reports - can be lots of these, so we'll suggest that at least service category
       should be supported as a search criteria    -->
      <type value="DiagnosticReport"/>
      <interaction>
        <code value="read"/>
      </interaction>
      <interaction>
        <code value="search-type"/>
      </interaction>
      <searchParam>
        <name value="_id"/>
        <type value="token"/>
        <documentation value="Standard _id parameter"/>
      </searchParam>
      <searchParam>
        <name value="service"/>
        <type value="token"/>
        <documentation value="which diagnostic discipline/department created the report"/>
      </searchParam>
    </resource>
  </rest>
</CapabilityStatement>

Usage note: every effort has been made to ensure that the examples are correct and useful, but they are not a normative part of the specification.