This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
20151216 FMG concall
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| HL7 TSC FMG Meeting Minutes Location: |
Date: 2015-12-16 Time: 4:00 PM U.S. Eastern | |
| Chair: | Note taker(s): Anne W. | |
| Quorum = chair + 4 | yes/no | |||||
| Co chairs | Regrets | David Hay | x | Lloyd McKenzie | ||
| ex-officio | Woody Beeler, Dave Shaver FGB Co-chairs |
. | John Quinn, CTO | |||
| Members | Members | Members | Observers/Guests | ||||
| x | Hans Buitendijk | x | Brian Postlethwaite | x | Paul Knapp | x | Anne W., scribe |
| Josh Mandel | x | John Moehrke | Brian Pech | x | Brian Scheller | ||
| x | Hetty Kahn | ||||||
| x | Michelle Williamson | ||||||
| x | Paula Braun | ||||||
| x | Eric Haas | ||||||
Agenda
- Roll Call
- Agenda Check
- Minutes from 20151209_FMG_concall
- Administrative
- Action items
- David will put the links in the Connectathon wiki to the scenarios and have the coordinators put the information in.
- Get in touch with Richard from AEGIS
- David will send note to listserve regarding request for change to ConceptMap
- Approval Items:
- Project Approval Request by the PHER WG of the DESD for Development and Maintenance of Vital Records Death Reporting FHIR Resources and Profiles
- Discussion Topics:
- When do we start to enforce the revised QA rules?
- Review cardinality of identifiers
- Term expirations an renewals
- Mechanism to update HQ as to WG participation in ballots
- Reports
- Connectathon management (David/Brian)
- FGB –
- MnM –
- FMG Liaisons –
- Process management
- Ballot Planning
- Ballot content review and QA process FHIR QA Guidelines
- AOB (Any Other Business)
Minutes
- Several guests: Paula Braun, Michelle Williamson, and Hetty Khan here to discuss PSS for death reporting.
- Decision to cancel 23rd. Will hold the time slot for the 30th and convene if something urgent comes up.
- ACTION: Anne to move ConceptMap issue (change to frozen resource) to January call or WGM.
- Project approval:
- Project Approval Request by the PHER WG of the DESD for Development and Maintenance of Vital Records Death Reporting FHIR Resources and Profiles
- Michelle Williamson presents project. Develops or creates new FHIR resources and profiles for death reporting. VR DAM serves as foundation. Will review and assess existing FHIR resources and then create resources to fill in the gaps. Will map the FHIR resource throughout the process. Paula adds that they're envisioning a SMART on FHIR app.
- Lloyd: what is the aspect of this that is US specific? Michelle: we are adhering as we have in other work to the US National Standard for death reporting.
- Lloyd: Do you intend to align your profiles with the data access framework profiles? Michelle: the intent overall is to mirror what's currently happening in the world of FHIR as much as possible, only proposing additional resources as they're absolutely necessary. Lloyd: DAF profiles are a set of US-specific profiles that align with meaningful use that defines constraint vocabulary. It would be useful and appropriate if your profiles end up being a proper subset of the DAF profiles which may involve coordinating with that project. Michelle: would it be appropriate to add a statement that we will review and align with DAF profiles as indicated? Lloyd: yes, that sounds fine. It makes things easier for US implementers in general if the rules that are coming to them are telling them to use the tools the same way. John: what parts do you think you'll be including in this effort? Paula: we'll get a better understanding of that as we develop and test it. The federal government doesn't set those standards - they are set by states. We won't know all of the nuances until we get closer to an implementation stage.
- John: why did you include SMART on FHIR as part of the need? Paula: that came out of our work with Georgia Tech who has done a lot of work in this area. We're envisioning a button that would pop up in the EMR, fitting seamlessly with physicians' current processes. Lloyd: they're planning to build on top of SMART on FHIR. John: Unclear about the wording. Perhaps an extra sentence at the end - while this project intends to make use of SMART on FHIR, it doesn't envision any additional profiling or change to the SMART on FHIR infrastructure. John: I'd like to see an IG that doesn't require SMART. If it really is just a profile of the resources, it doesn't need to call out SMART. Michelle: We tried to address this after the US Realm conversation. Lloyd: maybe say the IG won't be SMART dependent. John suggests removing SMART on FHIR from the first sentence. Group agrees.
- Project risks: Lloyd - if new resources are created, they will need to be universal and created by a work group. There shouldn't be any issue around long term funding for development and support of any resources. Suggestion to change "resources" to "artifacts" in the project risk section.
- Security risks: Lloyd notes no executables are noted, but above it states there will be an app that would clearly have security concerns. Make a note that you would leverage the security built into SMART. This risk would be noted in the future documentation of the project.
- Tmelines: Two possiblities - 1) If you're only defining profiles and publishing an IG, you can ballot it in whatever cycle you wish. 2) If you need a new resource or two, or need changes made to an existing resource, then you'll have to go on the FHIR Release 3 timeline for ballot. Expected to publish around the end of 2017. Not sure which ballot cycle it will be in, January or May. Change to 2017 or as recommended by FMG. Lloyd notes year gap between balloting and project end. Paula thought there would be a time period needed to gain stability before building the reference implementation. Lloyd states it will probably be sooner than that but it's good to have the time built in.
- 3.k. Project Dependencies: also dependent on what happens to SMART.
- 5.a.: Remove statement about actual balloting - will likely ballot independently.
- 6.e. Synchronizing with IHE
- MOTION by Hans to approve; second by John
- VOTE: all in favor
- Minutes from 2015-12-09:
- MOTION to approve by Brian Post; second by Paul
- VOTE: Hans abstains. Remaining in favor.
- Action items:
- David completed putting links in the Connectathon wiki
- Contacting AEGIS - will check with David to see if he reached out.
- Note regarding change to ConceptMap - complete
- When do we start to enforce QA rules?
- Lloyd thinks it is a bad idea to do that over Christmas break. Should announce revision at the WGM to set expectations on timelines. Group agrees that this is reasonable.
- Paul: mentions requirement to use FHIR Path and it hasn't received approval. Lloyd: it shouldn't need approval at this point. Paul states he is uncomfortable with how this is being rolled out with no adherence to stated process and we need to roll it back. Lloyd requests that we discuss this at the WGM with all the stakeholders present. It can't be a ballot process in situations like these. Admittedly we need to have a formal process. Brian Post: is FHIR Path on the site? Lloyd: can't become an official part of the spec until 3.0. Lloyd: we will be looking at what the role of the management committee is in situations like these. We do need sufficient opportunity for feedback. We don't have a process that states we need to consult with anyone when making changes to the build process. John: we've had many reviews of changes to the build process such as our recent review of warnings. Lloyd: that's being implemented through the build process, but is more related to FMM levels. Paul: this is a requirement to use a completely different mapping language. Lloyd: I'm not saying we followed the best process; we need to figure out what the process should be. I'm saying we shouldn't roll it back at this point. Paul: The process was not done by committee as it should be. Lloyd: It was discussed in FHIR Infrastructure and Lloyd will check the minutes. Paul: I am supportive of the principle of FHIR Path, but I'm not supportive of unreviewed changes. Hans: Is this an issue that should be decided in FHIR Infrastructure or FMG? Paul: I think there's an issue here for FMG. Brian: the change doesn't affect implementers. Lloyd: it doesn't impact implementers. Paul: Is FHIR Path now the required language? Lloyd: for resource creation, it appears to be. Lloyd: Implementers will be able to implement 2.1 ignoring it if they want to. Only the build tool requires it to be present. Will discuss process for changes and review in Orlando. If the outcome is that FHIR Path should not be mandated after that conversation, we will roll it back. Paul: the only thing that would need to be removed is the requirement for it. Lloyd: that may not be simple. Group agrees to discuss further in Orlando.
- Term expirations and renewals:
- Anne to check with TSC regarding appointments/renewals. Does anyone who is expiring not wish to stand for another term? Hans, Paul, Josh, David, Lloyd are all expiring - all willing to serve again.
- Call adjourned at 5:29 pm Eastern
Next Steps
| Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date) | |||
| Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items |
Back to FHIR_Management_Group
© 2015 Health Level Seven® International
