Not consistent with TSR or white paper.

[linophth]

https://github.com/preston/vha-kbs-knarts/blob/44bb353f460ce3502673efd2889a49b10c1df751/content/cardiology_catheterization/o30/CDSK_KRprt_SADT_O30CardCath.xml#L936

Chapter 2, secction 2. The concept of "suspected" is missing here, although it IS found in the TSR.

[juliaskapik]

The TSR codes the concepts that are expected to be coded in the EHR. While clinicians may consider differential diagnoses and have working diagnoses, these are not coded entries in existing EHR systems-- it would be possible to code these if this were truly desired; however the governance considerations of adding coded elements when a diagnosis is not confirmed would be significant. This may be better accomplished with local codes. Thus, this will be entered into the implementation concerns of the paper.

No action

[linophth]

@preston Asking Preston to chime in. I think I now understand that this is in the category of things that cannot be modeled because of KAS, and that for now we just have to accept that the intent is understood since it is expressed in the prompt.

[kthlnkeating]

Returning issue to PO.

[preston]

@linophth : I agree with @juliaskapik's comments. I would not classify this particular case as a KAS issue, however, as it is both a matter of policy and dependent on the types of logic supported by the underlying platform. The notion of "suspected" implies a degree of truthiness beyond what simple description logic provides. This degree of certainty could be coded in a value set as a workaround, but differences in the way the underlying system treats these could be profound, if not implausible to reconcile.

In any event, this is most definitely a future concern!