This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here

Oct 24 -

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Attendees: Stephen Chu Emma Jones George Dixon Joe Quinn Mike Padula Laura Heermann Viet Nguyen


  • Continue reviewing Viet’s slide deck re: Clinicians on FHIR – High Level Process
  • Questions: High level process slide. Any thing we would do differently? What is the purpose of having such a diagram? Where will we use it? Put it? Who is the target audience?

  • Suggest adding box to the right of outcomes analysis in the same column as the feedback one – to give more detail on what is done there related to more value based then – send to Viet nd Stephen so we can get the deck and Stephen will work on it.
*Observations and Analysis Slide:
    • • Large group/track tables are difficult to manage. – True. We all agree
    • • Difficult to transition beginners to becoming contributors
      • o Is it difficult to transition to contributor or is it a commitment problem?
      • o People show up once and don’t come back
      • o The don’t call in on weekly calls…
      • o We don’t have much of tutorial tracks or packets… for learning…
      • o We don’t provide value for continuous engagement.
      • o The engagement should perhaps be on the Thursday FHIR resource calls – not on the Tuesday planning calls… or other working group FHIR calls….
      • o Perhaps need to set expectations of participation to generate more commitment.

Chat: re "difficult to transition beginners to contributors"....would it be reasonable to pair up newbies with contributors as a shadow/mentor relationship?

      • o
    • • Pairs or triplets focused on a clear example have demonstrated some success
    • • Clinical Scenarios are important but need to be right sized in order to be testable
      • o Participants desire a “big picture” scenario, but these are difficult to test.
      • o Can we identify characteristic’s of a successful scenario?
        •  Not too much to read – but enough to provide context.
        •  Enough specific data to get started (patient info) and to test one or more resources…
        •  Can tell enough about the clinical story of the patient encapsulating the patient problem and the clinical intervention and the patient outcome. Sufficient clinical data for these areas.
        •  When we can move away from the abstract part of FHIR to connect to workflow or what the clinician is trying to do. Convey the connection of the various resources with a realistic story. Get away from the condition resource being in a place by itself but tells a story. Enabling others to be able to see that.
        •  Spreadsheets vs narrative – they serve different purposes…. Spreadsheets are helpful for beginners to see all the details…

Chat: The Health Story Project has a way of graphically representing a clinical scenario. See slide 14 of the presentation at this link:

  • • Tracking and documenting our work has been challenging.
      • o Currently we have gForge –
      • o Take notes at the report out and post on the wiki– but they don’t have much purpose. They are looked at during the planning
      • o Perhaps we don’t know what to document? We don’t have tools set up to document, we don’t have the expectation to document, there is an inherent complexity of what we are doing making it difficult to document – especially without a dedicated person to do it. Perhaps we need to designate roles- so there is a documentation person
      • o What we have at the end of the day that we didn’t before
      • o Go back to the goals of the event and what needs to be documented to meet those goals.
  • • Should focus more on trying to create/test existing resources to reinforce them or find gaps. Model design can be done outside of CoF in weekly calls (This one was not addressed – ran out of time)
  • • SUCCESSES – has advanced tremendously over the past 3 years (Thank David Hay!!!)