This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
March 25, 2016 Financial Management Work Group Conference Call
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Return to Financial Management Home Page
Conference Call Schedule
- Occurs on Fridays, 4 PM Eastern
- Phone Number: +1 770-657-9270 Participant Passcode: 686300# (alternative for US if the first number doesn't work: +1 888-321-4501)
Attendees
| Member Name | |
|---|---|
| Kathleen Connor Co-chair | x |
| Beat Heggli Co-chair | |
| Paul Knapp Co-chair | x |
| John Moehrke Security Co-Chair | |
| Lorraine Constable | x |
| Andy Stechishin | x |
| Mark Scrimshire | |
| Grahame Grieve | |
| Corey Spears | |
| Mary Kay McDaniel |
Agenda
NOTE - Planning on 1.5 hour call
- Approval of FM March 18 Call Minutes
- Question to Mary Kay about representing Unit/Quantity and EPSDT/Family Planning fields on CMS 1500 [Line 24 column G and H)in FHIR Claim.
- Finalizing on FM FHIR Resources for Connectathon Freeze.
- [If time allows] v2.9 proposal by Frank Oemig and Beat Hegg, which needs a formal proposal, motion, and acceptance:
- Issue: the problem is that the two PRT - and also ROL - segments at the beginning of the two message structures are optional and only separated by optional segments. So there is no way to identify whether PRT or ROL are used before or after PV1/PV2.
- Recommendation is to introduce an optional group for visit information, starting with PV1 making it required in this optional group. Semantically and from an ER7 point of view it would stay the same. The XML schema generation would result in a different structure, but that is fine because it solves a problem.
Minutes
- Kathleen chaired. Agenda and March 18th Minutes approved
- Discussed the datatypes to use in order to link Contract.term.topic to an external source.
- Kathleen discussed the definitional changes to Contract.topic, Contract.term.topic and Contract.subject proposed by CBCC - specifically to change the short-definition "Context of the Contract, and to add that to the element definition. Same changes were proposed for Contract.term.topic. Contract.subject definition revision proposed as "The target entity impacted by or of interest to parties to the agreement." The WG was fine with these changes after walking through a couple of use cases - e.g., the Context of the Contract "colors" the topic because different contract types will have different parameters and provisions. Andy moved, Paul seconded. 2-0-0.
