Task assignee in a-health treatment


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.

  1. Task.owner The entity responsible for Task execution.
  2. 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,

If Task is to be performed by the patient, then they would appear in both owner and for. If you wanted to capture someone who is simply observing the Task, that would need to be captured as an extension.

Ok, that makes sense @lloyd. Thanks for the clarification, much appreciated!