Can we add some information about CareTeam as a role?

[costateixeira]

For the cases where access to data is granted to a patient care team, we could add some considerations - perhaps a small section?

• Use of CareTeam
• CareTeam lifecycle
  • Use versioned CareTeams and have a link from permission to a specific version?
• CareTeam as a mechanism for permanent access vs temporary access e.g. a occasional pharmacy dispense

[JohnMoehrke]

not sure what you are asking for in a 'small section' . we are not creating an IG, we are using the IG publication tooling to develop the Permission resource.

I do like your use-case for development. How would a Permission use CareTeam (easy, but worth it). especially like your idea to do this as a versioned CareTeam in recognition that CareTeam does tend to change over time. However that would bring up a counter consideration that the Permission might then need to be changed to move with the change to CareTeam. Either of those outcomes might be the one desired. Worth explaining, and likely would be good to develop this concept for a note on the Permissions page about the pro and con of using versioned agent/entity references.

[costateixeira]

I would like to eventually take some of these outcomes and produce some guidance across resources. on the CareTeam - that is the point - what mechanisms are out there to help a system use the right version of the CareTeam. What requirements does this bring? A single-source / master for CareTeams? Or update the Permissions? Or we cascade Permissions? TBD

…

On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 1:06 PM John Moehrke ***@***.***> wrote: not sure what you are asking for in a 'small section' . we are not creating an IG, we are using the IG publication tooling to develop the Permission resource. I do like your use-case for development. How would a Permission use CareTeam (easy, but worth it). especially like your idea to do this as a versioned CareTeam in recognition that CareTeam does tend to change over time. However that would bring up a counter consideration that the Permission might then need to be changed to move with the change to CareTeam. Either of those outcomes might be the one desired. Worth explaining, and likely would be good to develop this concept for a note on the Permissions page about the pro and con of using versioned agent/entity references. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#26 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AD3HUUFTFLKBX25KKN4IKBLYY3KDDAVCNFSM6AAAAABE3F2UBKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDAMBTG4ZTMNZVGM> . You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[JohnMoehrke]

Note that Permission.rule.activity.actor can already today reference a CareTeam. So it is not clear what changes would be needed to the FHIR core resource.
However, working on the use-case within the data-access-policies IG might uncover something.