June 20th, Templates Minutes

Minutes:

1. Roll Call
   1. Dipak Karla (DK)
   2. Jane Curry (JC)
   3. Dale Nelson (DN)
   4. Russ Hamm (RH)
   5. Angelo Rossi Mori (ARM)
2. Agenda Check
   1. Remind people of url and uid/pwd for wiki when sending agenda.
3. Review / Discussion of Templates SIG Technical Scope
   1. Clinical Approach Background (ARM/RAH)
      1. How to manage clinical stream? Made proposal (in document sent last week.) Waiting for comments.
      2. Focus on transfer of care in clinical pathways (specifically chronic conditions.)
      3. See what types of documents people are sharing during transfer of care. Limit focus, to give a concrete example (ie. diabetes, cancer, etc.)
      4. Find out what types of docuemnts are used when sharing documents.
      5. Not collecting and aggregating clinical data sets, but customizing CDA. This seems reasonable.
      6. How is the data represented for the coordination of core.
      7. Representation examples for patient description.
      8. Start with a few pathology examples. Starting in Italy. Can we get some from IHC (Craig Parker, Stan Huff)
      9. Have physicians around tables in May
      10. Prepare examples/methodology.
      11. How to organize the alliance? What is the technological stream?
   2. Technical Approach Background (RAH)
      1. What to do once we have this broad representation examples for patient description.
         1. To identify or develop the templates object model to serve as a rigorous Domain Analysis model (DAM) under the HDF for the Templates SIG, the purpose of which is to describe what needs to be represented for Archetypes or Templates irrespective of whether or not the base reference model is intended to be CEN 13606, or HL7 RIM derived static models.
         2. To collaborate with the Modeling and Methodology TC in manifesting the Template presentation model with the evolving HL7 Template technical specification developed within the modeling and Methodology TC.
         3. To develop a reference implementation that demonstrates a real world clinical example, the constrained example represented in the Templates object model, and transformed into the expected MIF representation of constraints on RIM derived static models.
   3. Intersection point of Clinical and Technical streams.
   4. Intersection point with MnM Project(s)
      1. MnM needs to establish calls to get work mocing on the constraints project/templates.
      2. June 3 MnM, Scope Stmt for Constraints Project (CP) was developed.
         1. The CP is to search through the lore to locate, catalogue, and enumerate how to express information in a consistent means.
         2. Develop a way to represent the info in a non-mathematically rigorous way (easier to understand)
         3. Overlap with templates is on defining and expressing the constraints (also overlap with the MnM TC.)
         4. RH - What is the diff btwn an MnM Template vs a Templates SIG Template.
         5. DN - The domain. How to represent constraints in a certain domain.
         6. JC - Can construct a derived model from a parent model (MnM can do this now.) We are struggling with the operational capabilities of expressing non-structural constraints.
         7. DN - Some of the issue is a tension on wether we treat the MIF as a mechanism to operationally perform constraining processes between models. That in effect is using an ITS that may not be at a level people are comfortable using.
         8. JC - Useful to examine the structural constraining elements, as opposed to describe in a way that can be implimented using HL7 tools. But yet some people need tools (William's email.) Have a partial solution, but we need a description of the full solution so that we know how far away we are.
         9. - JC - So what does the Templates SIG need to do from the technical stand point? Develop a DAM that can be used as a description that people can look to and discuss.
         10. - RH - Templates needs to coordinate the technical goals within the Templates SIG and betewwn Templates and the MnM TC.
         11. - JC - We need to determine if the CEN description mmets the needs of HL7. Do not name a label, but come up with the description of what is needed. Then give it a label. Then look at the types of constraints necessary for the intended uses.
         12. - DK - Need to define the terms, then re-visit the labels. Prolly only 3 or 4 things to define. Very interested to see Jane's draft paper (next week or so.)
         13. - RH - Will put Jane's PPT presentation on wiki.
         14. - DK - Lots of effort within the realm of constraints within health informatics. Since so many types of models need to be communicated (specific and generic models.) We should not try to generalize all this into one. Keep aware of the types of models and use cases, and learn from eachother.
         15. - Is it worth while to enumerate the different types of contraint problems? Use cases?
4. Strategize on plan/timeline for Technical Scope (next week?)
5. Next Week's Agenda
   1. Review of ARM document.
   2. Review the technical stream on a later call to compartamentalize the approaches.
   3. JC - Alternate Clinical Stream and technical steam from week to week. Angelo should contace Clinical Decision Support. Invide Clinical decision support to a telecon. Craig Parker is a good contact point.
6. Adjourn

http://informatics.mayo.edu/wiki/index.php?title=June_20th%2C_Templates_Agenda