Use of CarePlan.author is discouraged. It is removed from the R5 CarePlan Resource and replaced with CarePlan.custodian and should not be used to indicate the responsible party. CarePlan custodian extension should be used to identify a responsible party in the MCC CarePlan Profile

CarePlan.contributor SHALL be used to represent contributors to the care plan instead of author in the MCC CarePlan. Contributors can range from devices (e.g. a home BP monitor) to an individual, team or organization

Identifies portions of the patient's record that specifically influenced the formation of the overall plan. These might include comorbidities, recent procedures, limitations, recent assessments, etc. These may be thought of as Health Concerns within the Care Plan context. In the MCC Care Plan, supportingInfo should refer to MCC Profiles. In most cases these profiles are profiles derived from US Core, with additional requirements or guidance for the use of these profiles within a Care Plan. Profiles not specifically referenced may also be used and are not precluded.

Describes the intended objective(s) of carrying out the care plan. In the MCC Care Plan, CarePlan.goal When used US Core Goal should be used.

This element details the outcome or action resulting from the activity. The reference to an "event" resource, such as Procedure or Encounter or Observation, is the result/outcome of the activity itself. The activity can be conveyed using the CarePlan.activity.reference (a reference to a “request” resource). In the MCC Care Plan, CarePlan.activity.OutcomeReference (Must Support) is preferred over outcomeCodeableConcept. Please see the libraries of available value sets pertinent for use with the appropriate Multiple Chronic Condition Care Plan Profile for use within the referenced profiles at CarePlan.activity.outcomeReference. Please also see the Care Plan Profile Relationship diagram for additional guidance <link?>. There is an existing Ticket FHIR- 26064 (https://jira.hl7.org/browse/FHIR-26064) with respect to clarifying the description and names for activity within Care Plan applied in R5: 1. Rename: activity.outcome to performedActivity, 2. Rename: activity.reference to plannedActivityReference. The R5 CarePlan does not have activity.detail, accordingly the MCC CarePlan prefers the use of the targeted reference of activity.outcomeReference for details.

This CarePlan element holds the details of the proposed activity represented in a specific resource. Planned activities represent ordered or planned activities that are part of the Care Plan.

Please see the libraries of available value sets pertinent for use with the appropriate Multiple Chronic Condition Care Plan Profile for use within the referenced profiles at CarePlan.activity.reference. The referred to profiles are suggested for use within the MCC Care Plan, but additional ServiceRequest may be used. When US Core R5 is published. US Core Service Request will be used and may be profiled to add additional requirements for when serviceRequest is used within a FHIR Care Plan

There is an existing Ticket FHIR- 26064 (https://jira.hl7.org/browse/FHIR-26064) with respect to clarifying the description and names for activity within Care Plan applied in R5: 1. Rename: activity.outcome to performedActivity, 2. Rename: activity.reference to plannedActivityReference. The R5 CarePlan does not have activity.detail, accordingly the MCC CarePlan prefers the use of the targeted reference for activity.reference to provide details.

-

-

Constrained value set of narrative statuses.

When populated, the custodian is responsible for the care and maintenance of the care plan. The care plan is attributed to the custodian. The custodian might or might not be a contributor. This CarePlan.custodian extension should be used instead of CarePlan.author which in R4 is currently identified as the designated responsible party and in R5 has been removed.

Indicates whether the plan is currently being acted upon, represents future intentions or is now a historical record.

Codes indicating the degree of authority/intentionality associated with a care plan

Type of plan.

Identifies what "kind" of plan this is to support differentiation between multiple co-existing plans; e.g. "Home health", "psychiatric", "asthma", "disease management", "wellness plan", etc.

• pattern @ $this

Type of plan.

Identifies what "kind" of plan this is to support differentiation between multiple co-existing plans; e.g. "Home health", "psychiatric", "asthma", "disease management", "wellness plan", etc.

Who care plan is for.

Identifies the patient or group whose intended care is described by the plan.

Use of CarePlan.author is discouraged. It is removed from the R5 CarePlan Resource and replaced with CarePlan.custodian and should not be used to indicate the responsible party. CarePlan custodian extension should be used to identify a responsible party in the MCC CarePlan Profile

CarePlan.contributor SHALL be used to represent contributors to the care plan instead of author in the MCC CarePlan. Contributors can range from devices (e.g. a home BP monitor) to an individual, team or organization

Identifies portions of the patient's record that specifically influenced the formation of the overall plan. These might include comorbidities, recent procedures, limitations, recent assessments, etc. These may be thought of as Health Concerns within the Care Plan context. In the MCC Care Plan, supportingInfo should refer to MCC Profiles. In most cases these profiles are profiles derived from US Core, with additional requirements or guidance for the use of these profiles within a Care Plan. Profiles not specifically referenced may also be used and are not precluded.

Describes the intended objective(s) of carrying out the care plan. In the MCC Care Plan, CarePlan.goal When used US Core Goal should be used.

This element details the outcome or action resulting from the activity. The reference to an "event" resource, such as Procedure or Encounter or Observation, is the result/outcome of the activity itself. The activity can be conveyed using the CarePlan.activity.reference (a reference to a “request” resource). In the MCC Care Plan, CarePlan.activity.OutcomeReference (Must Support) is preferred over outcomeCodeableConcept. Please see the libraries of available value sets pertinent for use with the appropriate Multiple Chronic Condition Care Plan Profile for use within the referenced profiles at CarePlan.activity.outcomeReference. Please also see the Care Plan Profile Relationship diagram for additional guidance <link?>. There is an existing Ticket FHIR- 26064 (https://jira.hl7.org/browse/FHIR-26064) with respect to clarifying the description and names for activity within Care Plan applied in R5: 1. Rename: activity.outcome to performedActivity, 2. Rename: activity.reference to plannedActivityReference. The R5 CarePlan does not have activity.detail, accordingly the MCC CarePlan prefers the use of the targeted reference of activity.outcomeReference for details.

This CarePlan element holds the details of the proposed activity represented in a specific resource. Planned activities represent ordered or planned activities that are part of the Care Plan.

Please see the libraries of available value sets pertinent for use with the appropriate Multiple Chronic Condition Care Plan Profile for use within the referenced profiles at CarePlan.activity.reference. The referred to profiles are suggested for use within the MCC Care Plan, but additional ServiceRequest may be used. When US Core R5 is published. US Core Service Request will be used and may be profiled to add additional requirements for when serviceRequest is used within a FHIR Care Plan

There is an existing Ticket FHIR- 26064 (https://jira.hl7.org/browse/FHIR-26064) with respect to clarifying the description and names for activity within Care Plan applied in R5: 1. Rename: activity.outcome to performedActivity, 2. Rename: activity.reference to plannedActivityReference. The R5 CarePlan does not have activity.detail, accordingly the MCC CarePlan prefers the use of the targeted reference for activity.reference to provide details.

-

-

The logical id of the resource, as used in the URL for the resource. Once assigned, this value never changes.

The only time that a resource does not have an id is when it is being submitted to the server using a create operation.

The metadata about the resource. This is content that is maintained by the infrastructure. Changes to the content might not always be associated with version changes to the resource.

A reference to a set of rules that were followed when the resource was constructed, and which must be understood when processing the content. Often, this is a reference to an implementation guide that defines the special rules along with other profiles etc.

Asserting this rule set restricts the content to be only understood by a limited set of trading partners. This inherently limits the usefulness of the data in the long term. However, the existing health eco-system is highly fractured, and not yet ready to define, collect, and exchange data in a generally computable sense. Wherever possible, implementers and/or specification writers should avoid using this element. Often, when used, the URL is a reference to an implementation guide that defines these special rules as part of it's narrative along with other profiles, value sets, etc.

The base language in which the resource is written.

Language is provided to support indexing and accessibility (typically, services such as text to speech use the language tag). The html language tag in the narrative applies to the narrative. The language tag on the resource may be used to specify the language of other presentations generated from the data in the resource. Not all the content has to be in the base language. The Resource.language should not be assumed to apply to the narrative automatically. If a language is specified, it should it also be specified on the div element in the html (see rules in HTML5 for information about the relationship between xml:lang and the html lang attribute).

A human-readable narrative that contains a summary of the resource and can be used to represent the content of the resource to a human. The narrative need not encode all the structured data, but is required to contain sufficient detail to make it "clinically safe" for a human to just read the narrative. Resource definitions may define what content should be represented in the narrative to ensure clinical safety.

Contained resources do not have narrative. Resources that are not contained SHOULD have a narrative. In some cases, a resource may only have text with little or no additional discrete data (as long as all minOccurs=1 elements are satisfied). This may be necessary for data from legacy systems where information is captured as a "text blob" or where text is additionally entered raw or narrated and encoded information is added later.

Unique id for the element within a resource (for internal references). This may be any string value that does not contain spaces.

May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the element. To make the use of extensions safe and manageable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer can define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension.

There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.

• value @ url

The status of the narrative - whether it's entirely generated (from just the defined data or the extensions too), or whether a human authored it and it may contain additional data.

The actual narrative content, a stripped down version of XHTML.

The contents of the html element are an XHTML fragment containing only the basic html formatting elements described in chapters 7-11 and 15 of the HTML 4.0 standard, <a> elements (either name or href), images and internally contained stylesheets. The XHTML content SHALL NOT contain a head, a body, external stylesheet references, scripts, forms, base/link/xlink, frames, iframes and objects.

These resources do not have an independent existence apart from the resource that contains them - they cannot be identified independently, and nor can they have their own independent transaction scope.

This should never be done when the content can be identified properly, as once identification is lost, it is extremely difficult (and context dependent) to restore it again. Contained resources may have profiles and tags In their meta elements, but SHALL NOT have security labels.

An Extension

• value @ url

When populated, the custodian is responsible for the care and maintenance of the care plan. The care plan is attributed to the custodian. The custodian might or might not be a contributor. This CarePlan.custodian extension should be used instead of CarePlan.author which in R4 is currently identified as the designated responsible party and in R5 has been removed.

May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the resource and that modifies the understanding of the element that contains it and/or the understanding of the containing element's descendants. Usually modifier elements provide negation or qualification. To make the use of extensions safe and manageable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer is allowed to define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension. Applications processing a resource are required to check for modifier extensions.

Modifier extensions SHALL NOT change the meaning of any elements on Resource or DomainResource (including cannot change the meaning of modifierExtension itself).

Modifier extensions allow for extensions that cannot be safely ignored to be clearly distinguished from the vast majority of extensions which can be safely ignored. This promotes interoperability by eliminating the need for implementers to prohibit the presence of extensions. For further information, see the definition of modifier extensions.

There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.

Business identifiers assigned to this care plan by the performer or other systems which remain constant as the resource is updated and propagates from server to server.

Allows identification of the care plan as it is known by various participating systems and in a way that remains consistent across servers.

This is a business identifier, not a resource identifier (see discussion). It is best practice for the identifier to only appear on a single resource instance, however business practices may occasionally dictate that multiple resource instances with the same identifier can exist - possibly even with different resource types. For example, multiple Patient and a Person resource instance might share the same social insurance number.

The URL pointing to a FHIR-defined protocol, guideline, questionnaire or other definition that is adhered to in whole or in part by this CarePlan.

The URL pointing to an externally maintained protocol, guideline, questionnaire or other definition that is adhered to in whole or in part by this CarePlan.

This might be an HTML page, PDF, etc. or could just be a non-resolvable URI identifier.

A care plan that is fulfilled in whole or in part by this care plan.

Allows tracing of the care plan and tracking whether proposals/recommendations were acted upon.

Completed or terminated care plan whose function is taken by this new care plan.

Allows tracing the continuation of a therapy or administrative process instantiated through multiple care plans.

The replacement could be because the initial care plan was immediately rejected (due to an issue) or because the previous care plan was completed, but the need for the action described by the care plan remains ongoing.

A larger care plan of which this particular care plan is a component or step.

Each care plan is an independent request, such that having a care plan be part of another care plan can cause issues with cascading statuses. As such, this element is still being discussed.

Indicates whether the plan is currently being acted upon, represents future intentions or is now a historical record.

Indicates whether the plan is currently being acted upon, represents future intentions or is now a historical record.

The unknown code is not to be used to convey other statuses. The unknown code should be used when one of the statuses applies, but the authoring system doesn't know the current state of the care plan.

This element is labeled as a modifier because the status contains the code entered-in-error that marks the plan as not currently valid.

Indicates the level of authority/intentionality associated with the care plan and where the care plan fits into the workflow chain.

Proposals/recommendations, plans and orders all use the same structure and can exist in the same fulfillment chain.

This element is labeled as a modifier because the intent alters when and how the resource is actually applicable.

Type of plan.

Identifies what "kind" of plan this is to support differentiation between multiple co-existing plans; e.g. "Home health", "psychiatric", "asthma", "disease management", "wellness plan", etc.

There may be multiple axes of categorization and one plan may serve multiple purposes. In some cases, this may be redundant with references to CarePlan.concern.

• pattern @ $this

Type of plan.

Identifies what "kind" of plan this is to support differentiation between multiple co-existing plans; e.g. "Home health", "psychiatric", "asthma", "disease management", "wellness plan", etc.

There may be multiple axes of categorization and one plan may serve multiple purposes. In some cases, this may be redundant with references to CarePlan.concern.

Human-friendly name for the care plan.

A description of the scope and nature of the plan.

Provides more detail than conveyed by category.

Who care plan is for.

Identifies the patient or group whose intended care is described by the plan.

The Encounter during which this CarePlan was created or to which the creation of this record is tightly associated.

This will typically be the encounter the event occurred within, but some activities may be initiated prior to or after the official completion of an encounter but still be tied to the context of the encounter. CarePlan activities conducted as a result of the care plan may well occur as part of other encounters.

Indicates when the plan did (or is intended to) come into effect and end.

Allows tracking what plan(s) are in effect at a particular time.

Any activities scheduled as part of the plan should be constrained to the specified period regardless of whether the activities are planned within a single encounter/episode or across multiple encounters/episodes (e.g. the longitudinal management of a chronic condition).

Represents when this particular CarePlan record was created in the system, which is often a system-generated date.

Use of CarePlan.author is discouraged. It is removed from the R5 CarePlan Resource and replaced with CarePlan.custodian and should not be used to indicate the responsible party. CarePlan custodian extension should be used to identify a responsible party in the MCC CarePlan Profile

The author may also be a contributor. For example, an organization can be an author, but not listed as a contributor.

CarePlan.contributor SHALL be used to represent contributors to the care plan instead of author in the MCC CarePlan. Contributors can range from devices (e.g. a home BP monitor) to an individual, team or organization

Collaborative care plans may have multiple contributors.

Identifies all people and organizations who are expected to be involved in the care envisioned by this plan.

Allows representation of care teams, helps scope care plan. In some cases may be a determiner of access permissions.

Identifies the conditions/problems/concerns/diagnoses/etc. whose management and/or mitigation are handled by this plan.

Links plan to the conditions it manages. The element can identify risks addressed by the plan as well as active conditions. (The Condition resource can include things like "at risk for hypertension" or "fall risk".) Also scopes plans - multiple plans may exist addressing different concerns.

When the diagnosis is related to an allergy or intolerance, the Condition and AllergyIntolerance resources can both be used. However, to be actionable for decision support, using Condition alone is not sufficient as the allergy or intolerance condition needs to be represented as an AllergyIntolerance.

Unique id for the element within a resource (for internal references). This may be any string value that does not contain spaces.

May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the element. To make the use of extensions safe and manageable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer can define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension.

There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.

• value @ url

A reference to a location at which the other resource is found. The reference may be a relative reference, in which case it is relative to the service base URL, or an absolute URL that resolves to the location where the resource is found. The reference may be version specific or not. If the reference is not to a FHIR RESTful server, then it should be assumed to be version specific. Internal fragment references (start with '#') refer to contained resources.

Using absolute URLs provides a stable scalable approach suitable for a cloud/web context, while using relative/logical references provides a flexible approach suitable for use when trading across closed eco-system boundaries. Absolute URLs do not need to point to a FHIR RESTful server, though this is the preferred approach. If the URL conforms to the structure "/[type]/[id]" then it should be assumed that the reference is to a FHIR RESTful server.

The expected type of the target of the reference. If both Reference.type and Reference.reference are populated and Reference.reference is a FHIR URL, both SHALL be consistent.

The type is the Canonical URL of Resource Definition that is the type this reference refers to. References are URLs that are relative to http://hl7.org/fhir/StructureDefinition/ e.g. "Patient" is a reference to http://hl7.org/fhir/StructureDefinition/Patient. Absolute URLs are only allowed for logical models (and can only be used in references in logical models, not resources).

This element is used to indicate the type of the target of the reference. This may be used which ever of the other elements are populated (or not). In some cases, the type of the target may be determined by inspection of the reference (e.g. a RESTful URL) or by resolving the target of the reference; if both the type and a reference is provided, the reference SHALL resolve to a resource of the same type as that specified.

An identifier for the target resource. This is used when there is no way to reference the other resource directly, either because the entity it represents is not available through a FHIR server, or because there is no way for the author of the resource to convert a known identifier to an actual location. There is no requirement that a Reference.identifier point to something that is actually exposed as a FHIR instance, but it SHALL point to a business concept that would be expected to be exposed as a FHIR instance, and that instance would need to be of a FHIR resource type allowed by the reference.

When an identifier is provided in place of a reference, any system processing the reference will only be able to resolve the identifier to a reference if it understands the business context in which the identifier is used. Sometimes this is global (e.g. a national identifier) but often it is not. For this reason, none of the useful mechanisms described for working with references (e.g. chaining, includes) are possible, nor should servers be expected to be able resolve the reference. Servers may accept an identifier based reference untouched, resolve it, and/or reject it - see CapabilityStatement.rest.resource.referencePolicy.

When both an identifier and a literal reference are provided, the literal reference is preferred. Applications processing the resource are allowed - but not required - to check that the identifier matches the literal reference

Applications converting a logical reference to a literal reference may choose to leave the logical reference present, or remove it.

Reference is intended to point to a structure that can potentially be expressed as a FHIR resource, though there is no need for it to exist as an actual FHIR resource instance - except in as much as an application wishes to actual find the target of the reference. The content referred to be the identifier must meet the logical constraints implied by any limitations on what resource types are permitted for the reference. For example, it would not be legitimate to send the identifier for a drug prescription if the type were Reference(Observation|DiagnosticReport). One of the use-cases for Reference.identifier is the situation where no FHIR representation exists (where the type is Reference (Any).

Plain text narrative that identifies the resource in addition to the resource reference.

This is generally not the same as the Resource.text of the referenced resource. The purpose is to identify what's being referenced, not to fully describe it.

Identifies portions of the patient's record that specifically influenced the formation of the overall plan. These might include comorbidities, recent procedures, limitations, recent assessments, etc. These may be thought of as Health Concerns within the Care Plan context. In the MCC Care Plan, supportingInfo should refer to MCC Profiles. In most cases these profiles are profiles derived from US Core, with additional requirements or guidance for the use of these profiles within a Care Plan. Profiles not specifically referenced may also be used and are not precluded.

Identifies barriers and other considerations associated with the care plan.

Use "concern" to identify specific conditions addressed by the care plan.

Describes the intended objective(s) of carrying out the care plan. In the MCC Care Plan, CarePlan.goal When used US Core Goal should be used.

Provides context for plan. Allows plan effectiveness to be evaluated by clinicians.

Goal can be achieving a particular change or merely maintaining a current state or even slowing a decline.

Identifies a planned action to occur as part of the plan. For example, a medication to be used, lab tests to perform, self-monitoring, education, etc.

Allows systems to prompt for performance of planned activities, and validate plans against best practice.

Unique id for the element within a resource (for internal references). This may be any string value that does not contain spaces.

May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the element. To make the use of extensions safe and manageable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer can define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension.

There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.

May be used to represent additional information that is not part of the basic definition of the element and that modifies the understanding of the element in which it is contained and/or the understanding of the containing element's descendants. Usually modifier elements provide negation or qualification. To make the use of extensions safe and manageable, there is a strict set of governance applied to the definition and use of extensions. Though any implementer can define an extension, there is a set of requirements that SHALL be met as part of the definition of the extension. Applications processing a resource are required to check for modifier extensions.

Modifier extensions SHALL NOT change the meaning of any elements on Resource or DomainResource (including cannot change the meaning of modifierExtension itself).

Modifier extensions allow for extensions that cannot be safely ignored to be clearly distinguished from the vast majority of extensions which can be safely ignored. This promotes interoperability by eliminating the need for implementers to prohibit the presence of extensions. For further information, see the definition of modifier extensions.

There can be no stigma associated with the use of extensions by any application, project, or standard - regardless of the institution or jurisdiction that uses or defines the extensions. The use of extensions is what allows the FHIR specification to retain a core level of simplicity for everyone.

Identifies the outcome at the point when the status of the activity is assessed. For example, the outcome of an education activity could be patient understands (or not).

Note that this should not duplicate the activity status (e.g. completed or in progress).

This element details the outcome or action resulting from the activity. The reference to an "event" resource, such as Procedure or Encounter or Observation, is the result/outcome of the activity itself. The activity can be conveyed using the CarePlan.activity.reference (a reference to a “request” resource). In the MCC Care Plan, CarePlan.activity.OutcomeReference (Must Support) is preferred over outcomeCodeableConcept. Please see the libraries of available value sets pertinent for use with the appropriate Multiple Chronic Condition Care Plan Profile for use within the referenced profiles at CarePlan.activity.outcomeReference. Please also see the Care Plan Profile Relationship diagram for additional guidance <link?>. There is an existing Ticket FHIR- 26064 (https://jira.hl7.org/browse/FHIR-26064) with respect to clarifying the description and names for activity within Care Plan applied in R5: 1. Rename: activity.outcome to performedActivity, 2. Rename: activity.reference to plannedActivityReference. The R5 CarePlan does not have activity.detail, accordingly the MCC CarePlan prefers the use of the targeted reference of activity.outcomeReference for details.

Links plan to resulting actions.

The activity outcome is independent of the outcome of the related goal(s). For example, if the goal is to achieve a target body weight of 150 lbs and an activity is defined to diet, then the activity outcome could be calories consumed whereas the goal outcome is an observation for the actual body weight measured.

Notes about the adherence/status/progress of the activity.

Can be used to capture information about adherence, progress, concerns, etc.

This element should NOT be used to describe the activity to be performed - that occurs either within the resource pointed to by activity.detail.reference or in activity.detail.description.

This CarePlan element holds the details of the proposed activity represented in a specific resource. Planned activities represent ordered or planned activities that are part of the Care Plan.

Please see the libraries of available value sets pertinent for use with the appropriate Multiple Chronic Condition Care Plan Profile for use within the referenced profiles at CarePlan.activity.reference. The referred to profiles are suggested for use within the MCC Care Plan, but additional ServiceRequest may be used. When US Core R5 is published. US Core Service Request will be used and may be profiled to add additional requirements for when serviceRequest is used within a FHIR Care Plan

There is an existing Ticket FHIR- 26064 (https://jira.hl7.org/browse/FHIR-26064) with respect to clarifying the description and names for activity within Care Plan applied in R5: 1. Rename: activity.outcome to performedActivity, 2. Rename: activity.reference to plannedActivityReference. The R5 CarePlan does not have activity.detail, accordingly the MCC CarePlan prefers the use of the targeted reference for activity.reference to provide details.

Details in a form consistent with other applications and contexts of use.

Standard extension exists (resource-pertainsToGoal) that allows goals to be referenced from any of the referenced resources in CarePlan.activity.reference.
The goal should be visible when the resource referenced by CarePlan.activity.reference is viewed independently from the CarePlan. Requests that are pointed to by a CarePlan using this element should not point to this CarePlan using the "basedOn" element. i.e. Requests that are part of a CarePlan are not "based on" the CarePlan.

A simple summary of a planned activity suitable for a general care plan system (e.g. form driven) that doesn't know about specific resources such as procedure etc.

Details in a simple form for generic care plan systems.

General notes about the care plan not covered elsewhere.

Used to capture information that applies to the plan as a whole that doesn't fit into discrete elements.