This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
<meta name="googlebot" content="noindex">

20140603 US Realm TF Call

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

back to US Realm Task Force
back to US Realm Task Force Conference Calls

US Realm Task Force Call Agenda/Minutes

Location: call 770-657-9270 using code 985371#

Date: 2014-06-03
Time: 1 PM Eastern
Facilitator Ed/Ken Note taker(s) Lynn
Attendee / Name
x Calvin Beebe x Woody Beeler x Keith Boone
Joe Bormel x Lorraine Constable Julie Crouse
x John Feikema Freida Hall x Ed Hammond
Tony Julian x Paul Knapp x Austin Kreisler
x Lynn Laakso x Ken McCaslin John Quinn
x David Susanto Pat VanDyke
Visitor / Name
x Mark Kramer x Bryn Rhodes
no quorum definition




  • Review of any outstanding issues
    • DAF - pending updated PSS


Ed convenes at 1:03 PM
  • Agenda review - only one item
  • Review notes from 20140527_US_Realm_TF_Call
  • Project Review
    • Project Approval request of Clinical Quality Expression Language for CDS of SSD SD cosponsored by CQI of DESD at Project Insight # 1108 and TSC Tracker #3302
      • Bryn describes the project.
      • Lorraine asks about correlation to other work. Bryn describes the analysis that was done. Paul asks to see some documentation of the analysis. Bryn agrees it could be added to the deliverables.
      • Austin asks about the quality measures authors and other developers who will have to support it if they are prepared to implement this? The path is in line with the HeD target. Austin notes that the underlying model to support FHIR is not indicated - that it is V3 (products are V3 Documents-Knowledge). Will it be a V3 RIM-based product or FHIR-based? Keith notes that FHIR is largely derived from the RIM so is it a different product family? If this project is to work with FHIR it needs more clarity in its definition. There is also a different PSS form to use for FHIR work. Keith further notes that this work is far-reaching and aggressively timed. Bryn notes they wish to keep the expression aspects separate from the underlying model. This will define logic that can then be used by clinical quality measures and decisions support rules.
      • Ed notes that you might use a new product definition but you have to identify what kind of objects you will use and they will have a model of some kind. Lorraine notes we have existing expression languages that might be considered. Bryn notes the HeD analysis includes that work and looked at Gello, Arden, and HQMF and they were all incomplete for their target. This work builds on that analysis. Paul then asks why creating something completely new preferable to filling in the holes in one of the existing expression languages? Ed asks how much discussion has taken place in CDS regarding this. Keith asserts it has been discussed at length with consensus on approach to the problem being elusive.
      • Bryn notes that they have chosen this path to achieve implementability within the knowledge artifact space on the CDS side. It does not imply specific technology or data model; separating decision logic from the model. Gello and Arden have implementation consistency issues and so they wished to go into this as a green field.
      • Keith notes lack of alignment with existing HL7 methodologies and standards is of concern. Bryn notes their pilot use cases of decision support as well as quality measures make it less able to conform. Paul asks if they could document their 'story' and point out the analysis that has already been done so the group can review and see how the need is there to justify this direction.
      • Austin further notes that if you're generating xml schemas then ITS should be involved with defining wire formats. Need to uncheck V3 and check new product box and provide a paragraph describing the new product.
      • Lorraine asks if there is relation to SDC with the data elements? They intend to collaborate with those groups for coordination and overlap.
      • Ed suggests they go back and add more details and bring it back again. Woody asks if their review would consider an alternate schedule; Bryn notes that ONC has relaxed their approach and they will be able to revise.
      • Bryn recaps they will change the product definition from V3 Documents to new product definition and add a paragraph on what they are looking at producing, adding ITS as cosponsor, add to project need an extended discussion on rationale from the analysis, and an updated schedule. He asks if these changes need to go back to the WGs for approval? Austin suggests the cosponsors should be consulted but it might not need to go through Steering Division again. Paul notes that ITS is only interested in the XML part; the expression language itself should be universal; perhaps it should be described in the different parts. ITS WG's responsibility for working with the representation of the work in the XML schema could be described in the PSS. However, the entire project is currently marked US Realm and its artifacts would have to be balloted as same and international participation is not indicated.
    • Keith asks Feik to aid in the HL7 US Realm Task Force awareness of program and portfolio management of the ONC project requests and related standards and how they fit together; sets of programs, an overall portfolio, etc. Ed notes that there is an SOU being prepared with ONC and the S&I effort that describes some of this. Keith notes that such an overview would help prepare WGs in understanding when PSSes come in just days before deadlines. Feik notes that they did such a presentation a couple months ago and perhaps a regular update would be useful. Austin would like to see what their architecture perspective is for all these programs and how the HL7 standards fit into their architecture. Ed suggests we might discuss at the September F2F.
    • Ed turns over to Ken and leaves the call

There being no further business the call adjourned 1:49 PM

Meeting Outcomes

  • Feik will do an update to the project portfolio presentation
  • Bryn will change the product definition from V3 Documents to new product definition and add a paragraph on what they are looking at producing, adding ITS as cosponsor, add to project need an extended discussion on rationale from the analysis, and an updated schedule. After cosponsor endorsement they will bring back to US Realm Task Force
Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items

© 2014 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved