-
Question
-
Resolution: Answered
-
Minor
-
None
-
Logic affecting more than 1 eCQM
Our developers are getting started on QRDA work right now in order to certify around May. While I know Cypress will not validate the CMS combined implementation guide, is there any risk to having them code to the specs in the CMS combined implementation guide vs. the QRDA errata guide? Will we pass Cypress validation if we have any "extra" required components that CMS needs that are not required in the QRDA errata?
- clones
-
CYPRESS-546
Confirm if Combined CMS IG will pass Cypress 2.6 validation
-
- Closed
-
- is cloned by
-
CYPRESS-667 The CMS Implementation Guide states that payers are coded as Payer Groups A-D, but Cypress is giving me this error:expected supplemental data for IPP PAYER 349 value [7] does not match reported supplemental data value []
-
- Closed
-
- is duplicated by
-
CYPRESS-588
same as Cypress -418:IPP PAYER 349 value [7] does not match reported supplemental data value []
-
- Closed
-
-
CYPRESS-613
Could not find entry for measure 40280381-4555-E1C1-0145-D2B36DBB3FE6 with the population ids
-
- Closed
-
-
CYPRESS-797
validation utiilty CMS Clincial codes vs Source of Payments vs Cypress Test Exection of qrda III
-
- Closed
-
-
CYPRESS-622
can't upload cat 3 data - starting with CMS165 -- expected supplemental data for IPP PAYER 349 value [3] does not match reported supplemental data value []
-
- Closed
-
- relates to
-
CYPRESS-999
Errors in QRDA III file for CMS50v4
-
- Closed
-
-
CYPRESS-807
Payer code 349 is expected, while validating QRDA 3 report
-
- Closed
-