20141126 FMG concall
|HL7 TSC FMG Meeting Minutes
|Date: 2014-11-25 |
Time: 12:30 PM U.S. Eastern
|Quorum = chair + 4||yes/no|
|Co chairs||x||David Hay||Lloyd McKenzie|
|x||John Quinn, CTO|
|Hans Buitendijk||Hugh Glover||x||Paul Knapp||x||Anne W., scribe|
|x||Josh Mandel||x||John Moehrke||x||Brian Pech|
- Roll Call
- Agenda Check
- Minutes from 20141119_FMG_concall
- Action items
- Josh to work on fleshing out the details of the Connectathon themes
- Review/discussion of FHIR Change Requests
- Review/discussion of FHIR Profile and IG Balloting
- Anne to update FHIR Profile Proposal template to include "realm"
- Anne to identify Project Insight ID for DeviceCapabilities and DeviceComponent FHIR proposals
- Anne to followup with all contacts whose proposals require edits (all proposals today require edits)
- Action items
- Resource Proposal Review
- Eligibility FHIR Resource Proposal
- EligibilityResponse FHIR Resource Proposal
- EligibilityRequest FHIR Resource Proposal
- Enrollment FHIR Resource Proposal
- Enrollment Request FHIR Resource Proposal
- Enrollment Response FHIR Resource Proposal
- EOBRequest FHIR Resource Proposal
- EpisodeOfCare FHIR Resource Proposal
- ExplanationOfBenefit FHIR Resource Proposal
- Process management
- Ballot Planning
- Ballot content review and QA process FHIR QA Guidelines
- AOB (Any Other Business)
- Meeting called to order at 12:35.
- Addition of Brian Postlethwaite – adding to agenda.
- Agenda approved: Paul, Josh seconds.
- Minutes from 11/19/14: Motion to accept by Josh; Paul seconds.
- Addition of Brian Postlethwaite.: He has accepted the opportunity to be part of the group. However, the timing of the meetings could be inconvenient for him (middle of the night due to his time zone). David will reach out to discuss the current timing issue with Brian.
- Josh has had initial discussions with Grahame re: Connectathon themes. Concern about tying security models to information model. Don’t want DSTU to be something that we do without thoughts as to how security integration can occur. The fact that there is a technical capability doesn’t mean you can’t apply a policy to it (John). Discussion will continue as we move toward the Connectathon with the Security WG.
- DocumentRoot: What is the difference between this and Composition? Paul states this looks like the old version of Document. John asks, is this the Resource Proposal that retroactively created Composition. Discussion regarding how to manage these documents whose name, etc. have changed. DocumentRoot should be renamed Composition; Paul moves, John seconds. David will rename.
- Eligibility: Not service level – coverage level – is policy in force. Encoding what the eligibility request is, leveraging all other appropriate resources. Should it be called EligibilityRequest. Paul agrees from a clarity perspective. Discussion over industry naming vs. FHIR resource naming. Josh describes Operation Definition; designed to describe operations that takes into account a number of parameters that resolve into a single outcome. Could be used over Http, associated with a resource, or a messaging paradigm. We could define a binding or a mapping between FHIR operations and WSI? Operation is a transport mechanism independent of the content models. It uses the content models but is separate. FHIR is both content and transports, but there is no requirement that one use the transport with the content models. Operations play a middle ground, are dynamic. John’s concerns about operations is that there is no reusable pattern. Suggests that we agree that as proposed, these requests beg for a better way to model requests. Too soon to say we have to dump the set of Requests that have been proposed, but we should look at how this evolves in the future to maybe use the infrastructure that Operations defines.
FHIR eClaim Resources slide discussed re: business activities’ request and response resources. John Q. asks where this information come from, is Attachments involved; Paul replies they are being looped in. John expresses concern that too much is being grouped. Group agrees to explore the issue further at a later date. Action 1: Paul to make sure all the resource proposals have text. Action 2: Consider what alternative names might be for resources on next week’s call. Call adjourned at 2:00.
|Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)|
|Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items|
Back to FHIR_Management_Group
© 2014 Health Level Seven® International
Copyright © Health Level Seven International ® ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. The reproduction of this material in any form is strictly forbidden without the written permission of the publisher.