1 to 1 or 1 to Many: RelatedPerson and Patient Relationship


#1

Just curious about this relationship…

RelatedPerson resource has 1-1 cardinality to a Patient.

How would you store a Mother that is related to multiple kids?
Would you ended up creating two RelatedPerson that is linked to single Person via link.
So linke this

Person.link1 : RelatedPerson1(Mother)->Patient1

Person.link2 : RelatedPerson2(Mother)->Patient2

Person.link3 : RelatedPerson3(Mother)->Patient3

Person.link4 : RelatedPerson4(Mother)->Patient4

Is this looks right to group? LLyod?


#2

Patient.link is 0…*
You can have as many RelatedPerson resources linked to a Patient as you need.


#3

As per FHIR guidance, Patient.link shall be used only for this patient related resources. Here is a verbatim guidance…“Link to another patient resource that concerns the same actual person”.

So I do not think this is the way it will work. We can not use Patient.link. More over it does not have relationship type code as well.


#4

RelatedPerson is “owned” by the associated Patient. If you want to have a single record that captures multiple relationships to different Patients, you need the Person resource. The Person resource allows you to maintain shared demographics for multiple RelatedPerson, Patient and/or Practitioner instances. In this case, you’d have a Person who represents the mother and then a Patient and a RelatedPerson instance for each child. The Person would link to each of the RelatedPerson instances.


#5

Thank you Llyod. So this is the fundamental that RelatedPerson is owned by a patient hence 1-1 relationship.

So if I want to have a Hierarchical relationship between Persons. Like a family tree, how would I achieve?
Existing FHIR models assumes that world is centered on Person and Patient but relationship among various person is missing?

Like
Person1 <— —>Person


#6

Person is a linking resource. Its purpose is to tie together Patients, RelatedPersons and Practitioners. If you really want to track relationships for Persons, I guess you could use an extension.


#7

Thanks Lloyd. Yes, I was come to the same conclusion.