Greetings,
When assigning Tasks
to Patients
in the context of online e-health treatments, it seems like there are 2 options to “assign” the task to a Patient
.
-
Task.owner The entity responsible for
Task
execution. -
Task.for The entity that benefits from the
Task
execution.
They feel like the same person in this particular context as the Patient
both performs and benefits the Task
execution.
Question 1: Is the above correct?
We also have to assign a CareTeam
to a Task
. In our e-health context, the CareTeam
could consist of Practitioners
and RelatedPersons
that may be involved (observing, not executing) in that specific Task
.
In theory, we could assign the Patient
to Task.for
and the CareTeam
to Task.owner
. However, as mentioned before, this feels semantically incorrect.
Question 2: Am I reading the documentation too strict and should we just use for
& owner
fields? Or would it be better to create an explicit extension on Task
? The extension probably offers more clarity, but doesn’t come without a cost (deviate from the standard).
Thanks in advance,
Joris