35 Add Observation-glasgow-coma-scale.json as example of au-core-disagnoticresult with components

[heathfrankel]

Add Observation-glasgow-coma-scale.json as example of au-core-disagnoticresult with components

The generated Observation-glasgow-coma-scale.json currently fails upload to CDR due to missing {scale} code in UCUM fragment.

[heathfrankel]

This PR includes changes in #50, which should be merged first.
This was done to avoid conflicts on the Observation.csv

[StephThaoOng]

Hey @heathfrankel, while reviewing your PR, I'd suggest the following code changes:

👉 Code Suggestion for #51

#51
Hi Heath,
Review completed and pending UCUM fragment fix noted.
Suggested changes:

1. I'm unsure about the use of the AU Core Diagnostic Result Observation profile for a GCS assessment. Representing GCS score/assessment as base Observation seems more appropriate. Heather Leslie agrees with representation as on Observation and avoiding the 'diagnostic' label. Having said that and noting that meta.profile is for stating resource profile conformance, I wonder if we could populate meta.profile with both

• "http://hl7.org.au/fhir/core/StructureDefinition/au-core-diagnosticresult", and
• "http://hl7.org/fhir/StructureDefinition/Observation"?

2. I think it would be useful to include the individual GCS component numerical scores that add up to the total score.
3. referenceRange should include the ranges for mild, moderate and sever TBI.

You can also review and apply these suggestions locally on your machine.

Learn more about GitKraken Code Suggest

Code Suggest liberates your code reviews from GitHub's restrictive, comment-only feedback style. As simple as suggesting changes in a Google-doc, provide real code suggestions from where you code, e.g. your IDE, and on anything in your project — not just on the lines of code changed in the PR.

Join your team on GitKraken to speed up PR review.

[heathfrankel]

@StephThaoOng my response below:

1. as you say, meta.profile is more the structural conformance than semantic label, and in principle this exam/assessment has the same structural pattern. There is no existing observation profile to use, and Observation is inherit in the specified profile/resourceType. If someone can suggest/provide a better example of a diagnostic result with components I am more than happy to change this GCS example to a different profile (not that there is one in AU Core/Base).
   Would visual acuity be a candidate?
2. We can look at including the ordinal extension values associated with the component value coding elements, but this is beyond the AU Core profile and might just complicate the example too much at this stage. Happy to add if required.
3. Only the applicable reference range was provided due to a limitation in the current columns in the spreadsheet and mapping. Happy to add if required.

Should we raise a new github card for these suggested changes for future consideration?