Hello,

   We updated the resolution on Wednesday after the claims meeting, and the latest resolution has cut these options out, partly for the reasons you have specified.  Also there was concern about being a little too close to HIPPA information with the "non-sexed" and "unsex able" options.  Regarding the "not provided" and "not applicable", we thought "Unknown" speaks to both of these options, so we removed the redundancy. 

Jason Kreps wrote:

Sorry I was not able to participate in this working group so I don't have any of the background behind why or how these options where selected. Could someone please explain to me the difference between "non-sexed", "unknown", and "not provided"?  It sounds to me like "non-sexed" and "not provided" are reasons why it is "unknown" - not actually a different value.  Additionally, I'd think a claim handler would have a difficult time distinguishing between these and just pick "unknown" every time. I understand the importance of accurate data but when the difference between options becomes so nuanced it's difficult to tell the difference, you tend to end up getting less accurate data. Also, can you please provide an example or scenario when "not applicable" would the correct option? Thank you.