Development Issues
Phase I
Phase II
The Phase II of developments consists on the development of the following use cases:
- UC1: Patient Access (enchanced with Consent Management and other adjustments)
- UC2: Representative Access to eHealth Records
- UC3: HCP Identification
The following open questions require clarification:
| Question | Regarding UC1, its necessary to display the consent status for a given patient - in the consent management panel? (or just allow him to give/revoke consent) |
| Anwser | "To be answered by Gottfried Heider (Unlicensed) or @Robert Sharinger" |
| Question | Does STORK gives support to HCP identification, using Business attributes? If not, is it foreseen to be available? |
| Anwser | Florian Reimair (Unlicensed) "Hi there,
I somehow lost contact for the last few weeks with our pilot lead. I am on to reestablishing the connection and will then get back to you!
From a technical point of view, yes, HCP identification is working and provided by AT. Sweden is about to implement the attribute provider as well.
Hope this helps in the meantime!
Best Regards,
Florian"
|
| Question | Do the epSOS HCP assertions have support for the inclusion of on-behalf information? |
| Anwser | Soeren Bittins we indeed include an „on behalf of“ attribute within the HCP assertion of epSOS. The semantics is fairly simple: whenever a person is acting on behalf of another person the role of the latter is included within the assertions “urn:epsos:names:wp3.4:subject:on-behalf-of” element as a string-encoded attribute. I have attached the relevant section of the HCP Assertion attributes below: 
|
| Question | How can we access the information where "on-behalf" relations are described in Austria? |
| Anwser | "To be answered by Gottfried Heider (Unlicensed) or @Robert Sharinger" |