Add Permit Type and Consent Status in Consent Calculation

Author: Lucas0T

src/main/java/de/medizininformatikinitiative/torch/consent/ConsentFetcher.java

@@ -106,6 +106,7 @@ public Mono<PatientBatchWithConsent> buildConsentInfo(String key, PatientBatch b
         return dataStore.search(getConsentQuery(batch), Consent.class)
                 .doOnSubscribe(subscription -> logger.trace("Fetching resources for batch: {}", batch.ids()))
                 .doOnNext(resource -> logger.trace("Consent resource with id {} fetched for ConsentBuild", resource.getIdPart()))
+                .filter(consent -> consent.getStatus() == Consent.ConsentState.ACTIVE)
                 .concatMap(consent -> {
                     try {
                         String patientId = ResourceUtils.patientId(consent);

src/main/java/de/medizininformatikinitiative/torch/consent/ConsentProcessor.java

@@ -72,15 +72,17 @@ public Provisions transformToConsentPeriodByCode(Consent consent, Set<String> re
         List<Base> provisionPeriodList = extractConsentProvisions(consent);
         for (Base provisionBase : provisionPeriodList) {
             Consent.ProvisionComponent provision = (Consent.ProvisionComponent) provisionBase;
-            String code = provision.getCode().getFirst().getCoding().getFirst().getCode();
-            if (requiredCodes.contains(code)) {
-                Period period = provision.getPeriod();
-                DateTimeType start = period.hasStart() ? period.getStartElement() : null;
-                DateTimeType end = period.hasEnd() ? period.getEndElement() : null;
+            if (provision.getType().equals(Consent.ConsentProvisionType.PERMIT)) {
+                String code = provision.getCode().getFirst().getCoding().getFirst().getCode();
+                if (requiredCodes.contains(code)) {
+                    Period period = provision.getPeriod();
+                    DateTimeType start = period.hasStart() ? period.getStartElement() : null;
+                    DateTimeType end = period.hasEnd() ? period.getEndElement() : null;
 
-                // If no start or end period is present, skip to the next provision
-                if (start != null && end != null) {
-                    consentPeriodMap.computeIfAbsent(code, k -> new ArrayList<>()).add(de.medizininformatikinitiative.torch.model.consent.Period.fromHapi(period));
+                    // If no start or end period is present, skip to the next provision
+                    if (start != null && end != null) {
+                        consentPeriodMap.computeIfAbsent(code, k -> new ArrayList<>()).add(de.medizininformatikinitiative.torch.model.consent.Period.fromHapi(period));
+                    }
                 }
             }
 

src/test/java/de/medizininformatikinitiative/torch/consent/ConsentFetcherTest.java

@@ -0,0 +1,55 @@
+package de.medizininformatikinitiative.torch.consent;
+
+import ca.uhn.fhir.context.FhirContext;
+import de.medizininformatikinitiative.torch.exceptions.ConsentViolatedException;
+import de.medizininformatikinitiative.torch.model.management.PatientBatch;
+import de.medizininformatikinitiative.torch.service.DataStore;
+import org.hl7.fhir.r4.model.Consent;
+import org.junit.jupiter.api.Test;
+import org.junit.jupiter.api.extension.ExtendWith;
+import org.mockito.InjectMocks;
+import org.mockito.Mock;
+import org.mockito.junit.jupiter.MockitoExtension;
+import reactor.core.publisher.Flux;
+import reactor.test.StepVerifier;
+
+import java.util.List;
+
+import static org.assertj.core.api.Assertions.assertThat;
+import static org.mockito.ArgumentMatchers.any;
+import static org.mockito.Mockito.when;
+
+@ExtendWith(MockitoExtension.class)
+class ConsentFetcherTest {
+
+    @Mock
+    private DataStore dataStore;
+
+    @Mock
+    private ConsentCodeMapper mapper;
+
+    @Mock
+    private FhirContext fhirContext;
+
+
+    @InjectMocks
+    private ConsentFetcher consentFetcher;
+
+
+    @Test
+    void failsOnInactiveConsent() {
+        Consent consent = new Consent();
+        consent.setStatus(Consent.ConsentState.INACTIVE);
+        when(dataStore.search(any(), any())).thenReturn(Flux.just(consent));
+
+        var resultBatch = consentFetcher.buildConsentInfo("validCode", new PatientBatch(List.of("123")));
+
+
+        StepVerifier.create(resultBatch)
+                .expectErrorSatisfies(error -> assertThat(error)
+                        .isInstanceOf(ConsentViolatedException.class)
+                        .hasMessageContaining("No valid provisions found for any patients in batch"))
+                .verify();
+    }
+
+}

src/test/java/de/medizininformatikinitiative/torch/util/ConsentProcessorTest.java

@@ -78,6 +78,7 @@ void testTransformToConsentPeriodByCodeValid() throws ConsentViolatedException {
 
 
         when(mockProvision.getPeriod()).thenReturn(mockPeriod);
+        when(mockProvision.getType()).thenReturn(Consent.ConsentProvisionType.PERMIT);
         when(mockProvision.getCode()).thenReturn(Collections.singletonList(new CodeableConcept().addCoding(mockCoding)));
 
 
@@ -110,6 +111,25 @@ void testTransformToConsentPeriodByCodeNoPeriods() {
         assertThrows(ConsentViolatedException.class, () -> consentProcessor.transformToConsentPeriodByCode(consent, validCodes));
     }
 
+    @Test
+    @DisplayName("Test transformToConsentPeriodByCode - some codes are missing and should throw ConsentViolatedException")
+    void failsOnDeny() {
+        Consent consent = mock(Consent.class);
+
+        // Assume we are requesting two valid codes, but only one will be found
+        Set<String> validCodes = Set.of("VALID_CODE_1", "VALID_CODE_2");
+
+        // Mock provision for VALID_CODE_1
+        Consent.ProvisionComponent invalidProvision = mock(Consent.ProvisionComponent.class);
+        when(invalidProvision.getType()).thenReturn(Consent.ConsentProvisionType.DENY);
+        // Only VALID_CODE_1 is provided, VALID_CODE_2 is missing
+        when(fhirPath.evaluate(any(), anyString(), eq(Base.class))).thenReturn(List.of(invalidProvision));  // Only one valid provision
+
+        // Since VALID_CODE_2 is missing, an exception should be thrown
+        assertThrows(ConsentViolatedException.class, () -> consentProcessor.transformToConsentPeriodByCode(consent, validCodes));
+
+    }
+
 
     @Test
     @DisplayName("Test transformToConsentPeriodByCode - some codes are missing and should throw ConsentViolatedException")
@@ -121,6 +141,7 @@ void testTransformToConsentPeriodByCodePartialValidButOneMissing() {
 
         // Mock provision for VALID_CODE_1
         Consent.ProvisionComponent validProvision1 = mock(Consent.ProvisionComponent.class);
+        when(validProvision1.getType()).thenReturn(Consent.ConsentProvisionType.PERMIT);
         Period validPeriod1 = mock(Period.class);
         when(validProvision1.getPeriod()).thenReturn(validPeriod1);
         when(validProvision1.getCode()).thenReturn(Collections.singletonList(new CodeableConcept().addCoding(new Coding().setCode("VALID_CODE_1"))));