This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
Difference between revisions of "Negation Requirements Project Minutes 19 September 2018"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with "<!-- LOOK FOR THE APPROPRIATE SECTION ****** TO ENTER INFORMATION--> Back to Negation Minutes ==Minutes== ===Meeting Information=== {|border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacin...") |
|||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 101: | Line 101: | ||
'''Agenda Topics''' <br/> | '''Agenda Topics''' <br/> | ||
# status matrix | # status matrix | ||
| − | |||
===Minutes=== | ===Minutes=== | ||
| Line 115: | Line 114: | ||
<!-- **** Delete instructions and fill in minutes ON NEXT LINES ******--> | <!-- **** Delete instructions and fill in minutes ON NEXT LINES ******--> | ||
| − | # | + | # Review of [[Media: ProblemStatus.xlsx | Excel version of status matrix]] |
| − | + | ## Coordination with CDA | |
| − | + | ### Lisa is working with Jean Duteau | |
| + | ### Can we represent the CDA status matrix as well? | ||
| + | #### Yes, but do this first. | ||
| + | ## do we need to scope matrix to one version of FHIR? | ||
| + | ## Do we need workflow perspective to understand how these resources are generated? | ||
| + | ### That might be prohibitively expensive: 5 status * 6 status = 30 cases, but including transitions would mean ~30^2. | ||
| + | ## Inactive hierarchy | ||
| + | ### Does inactive mean not currently symptomatic but possibly of concern (viz., remission) or no longer present (viz., resolved)? | ||
| + | ### Seems to be a confusion resulting from the fact that this property tries to support two requirements: "Is it symptomatic?" and "Are we concerned?" | ||
| + | ### The answer may depend on folding in support for a concern requirement. | ||
| + | ### Additional dimensions | ||
| + | #### verification status - already broken out, though some argue it should not be | ||
| + | #### presence - can we infer this from the status combinations? should we also record it explicitly? | ||
===Meeting Outcomes=== | ===Meeting Outcomes=== | ||
Latest revision as of 21:24, 19 September 2018
Back to Negation Minutes
Minutes
Meeting Information
| HL7 PC-CIMI-POC Meeting Minutes Location: PC call line |
Date: 2018-09-19 Time: 4:00-5:00 PM ET | ||
| Facilitator | Jay Lyle | Note taker(s) | Jay Lyle |
| Attendee | Name | Affiliation
| |
| y | Jay Lyle | JP Systems | |
| y | Yanyan Hu | Joint Commission | |
| y | Senthil Nachimuthu | 3M | |
| y | Ken Lord | VA | |
| y | Rob Hausam | IMO | |
| Ben Hamlin | NCQA | ||
| y | Lisa Nelson | ||
| Emma Jones | Allscripts | ||
| y | George Dixon | Allscripts | |
| Michelle Miller | Cerner | ||
| Michael Padula | Cerner | ||
| Stephen Chu | |||
Agenda
Agenda Topics
- status matrix
Minutes
- Review of Excel version of status matrix
- Coordination with CDA
- Lisa is working with Jean Duteau
- Can we represent the CDA status matrix as well?
- Yes, but do this first.
- do we need to scope matrix to one version of FHIR?
- Do we need workflow perspective to understand how these resources are generated?
- That might be prohibitively expensive: 5 status * 6 status = 30 cases, but including transitions would mean ~30^2.
- Inactive hierarchy
- Does inactive mean not currently symptomatic but possibly of concern (viz., remission) or no longer present (viz., resolved)?
- Seems to be a confusion resulting from the fact that this property tries to support two requirements: "Is it symptomatic?" and "Are we concerned?"
- The answer may depend on folding in support for a concern requirement.
- Additional dimensions
- verification status - already broken out, though some argue it should not be
- presence - can we infer this from the status combinations? should we also record it explicitly?
- Coordination with CDA
Meeting Outcomes
Actions
|
| Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items Agenda for 9/19:
|
© 2012 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved.
