This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
Difference between revisions of "2011-11-14 Rx Conf Call"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Julie James (talk | contribs) |
Hugh Glover (talk | contribs) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
|} | |} | ||
| − | == | + | ==Attendees== |
| − | * List Discussions | + | * Chair - Hugh Glover, Scribe - Julie James, John Hatem, Vassil Peytchev, Tom de Jong, Scott Robertson, Mead Walker, Jean-Henri Duteau, Gerald Buchelt, Ana Estelrich |
| − | + | ||
| − | ** | + | ==List Discussions== |
| − | * | + | ===Mead's questions=== |
| − | + | *Method code – is present (SBADM is a child of PROC and procedure has method code) | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | Note: the SDTM is using CDA, and if there are things that are not in CDA, then possibly changes to CDA will be proposed | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | *Intended Dose Regimen – relating an actual administration to the Intended Dose Regimen using the "in fulfilment of" act relationship. The protocol "Intended Dose Regimen" is described using SBADM in DEFN mood. The text attribute is being added to the SBADM in DEFN mood in the A_ProductGuideline CMET in CPM, so the text for the Dose Regimen can go in that. | |
| − | + | ||
| − | ** | + | *Treatment vehicle – "saline" – is that an inactive ingredient? No, it's the carrier infusion fluid ("vehicle" is usually used in topical formulations). Maybe describe this as a compound product – either as an Ingredient or as a Part. If the protocol includes the vehicle directly, then the part role might be a better option. |
| − | * | + | |
| − | * | + | ===Version 2 Sliding Scales=== |
| − | * | + | Has been discussed in a small group - no good options have appeared, but Scott has some sort of an answer |
| − | *Action Item List | + | |
| − | * | + | ==Planning== |
| − | + | ===hData Project Scope Statement=== | |
| − | + | * SOA have sent an updated project scope statement (Gerald) | |
| − | + | * to go on agenda for next week with a view to voting on endorsing this. | |
| − | * | + | |
| − | + | ==Ballot Reconcilliation Spreadsheets== | |
| − | + | *Hugh has sent those into SVN | |
| + | *J-H has got them and starting processing them. | ||
| + | * Anyone using these from SVN – please do an update/complete download of these documents as the folder structure has changed. | ||
| + | *One outstanding item – comment from Nelson Tsing – Hugh has requested clarification but has not received any. Suggest that we dispose of this as "not persuasive" particularly since it was an affirmative-suggestion. No objections to this. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Action Item List== | ||
| + | * 68 open items. | ||
| + | Please check your open items to see if any can be closed. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Clinical Statement Comparison== | ||
| + | Most efficient will be to compare RMIM to CSMP rather than check back to DMIM. John H is starting with Med Order RMIM and comparing that to CSMP. Will be able to report something next week. | ||
| + | JH already has an action to take Med Statement RMIM and check back to DMIM. Would like to extend that to more RMIMs as soon as ballot stuff done. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==IHE Medication Profile White Paper== | ||
| + | * circulated to list. The document now contains extensive documentation of the objectives from Stephen Chu. | ||
| + | Vassil pointed out that the next major work is to add use cases, as all IHE profiles must flow from use cases. Comments to be shared by e-mail initially and Hugh will put it on the agenda for the meeting next week. | ||
| − | == | + | ==January Ballot Topics== |
| − | * | + | * Knowledgebase query (fixes) and IDMP (new content around CMETs). |
| − | * | + | * Reconciliation ballots will be sent to John H (by JH) for QA before being sent to Don for publishing as Normative. Will have Ballot Progress on the Agenda for next week. |
| + | |||
| + | ==AOB== | ||
| + | *Lise Stevens has been asking whether IDMP changes will have any effect on the ICSR standard being normative. Hugh will be looking at the ICSR schema to see what if any effects there might be. Likely that CPM will go back to ballot in May 2012. | ||
| − | + | *Datatypes R2 – when models are updated, they automatically go to R2. Should we have any material to support implementers? Guidance should probably be provided by HL7 (core) not by Pharmacy. Should we ask HL7 to do that? Discuss further next week. | |
Latest revision as of 22:34, 14 November 2011
|
Related Links |
Attendees
- Chair - Hugh Glover, Scribe - Julie James, John Hatem, Vassil Peytchev, Tom de Jong, Scott Robertson, Mead Walker, Jean-Henri Duteau, Gerald Buchelt, Ana Estelrich
List Discussions
Mead's questions
- Method code – is present (SBADM is a child of PROC and procedure has method code)
Note: the SDTM is using CDA, and if there are things that are not in CDA, then possibly changes to CDA will be proposed
- Intended Dose Regimen – relating an actual administration to the Intended Dose Regimen using the "in fulfilment of" act relationship. The protocol "Intended Dose Regimen" is described using SBADM in DEFN mood. The text attribute is being added to the SBADM in DEFN mood in the A_ProductGuideline CMET in CPM, so the text for the Dose Regimen can go in that.
- Treatment vehicle – "saline" – is that an inactive ingredient? No, it's the carrier infusion fluid ("vehicle" is usually used in topical formulations). Maybe describe this as a compound product – either as an Ingredient or as a Part. If the protocol includes the vehicle directly, then the part role might be a better option.
Version 2 Sliding Scales
Has been discussed in a small group - no good options have appeared, but Scott has some sort of an answer
Planning
hData Project Scope Statement
- SOA have sent an updated project scope statement (Gerald)
- to go on agenda for next week with a view to voting on endorsing this.
Ballot Reconcilliation Spreadsheets
- Hugh has sent those into SVN
- J-H has got them and starting processing them.
- Anyone using these from SVN – please do an update/complete download of these documents as the folder structure has changed.
- One outstanding item – comment from Nelson Tsing – Hugh has requested clarification but has not received any. Suggest that we dispose of this as "not persuasive" particularly since it was an affirmative-suggestion. No objections to this.
Action Item List
- 68 open items.
Please check your open items to see if any can be closed.
Clinical Statement Comparison
Most efficient will be to compare RMIM to CSMP rather than check back to DMIM. John H is starting with Med Order RMIM and comparing that to CSMP. Will be able to report something next week. JH already has an action to take Med Statement RMIM and check back to DMIM. Would like to extend that to more RMIMs as soon as ballot stuff done.
IHE Medication Profile White Paper
- circulated to list. The document now contains extensive documentation of the objectives from Stephen Chu.
Vassil pointed out that the next major work is to add use cases, as all IHE profiles must flow from use cases. Comments to be shared by e-mail initially and Hugh will put it on the agenda for the meeting next week.
January Ballot Topics
- Knowledgebase query (fixes) and IDMP (new content around CMETs).
- Reconciliation ballots will be sent to John H (by JH) for QA before being sent to Don for publishing as Normative. Will have Ballot Progress on the Agenda for next week.
AOB
- Lise Stevens has been asking whether IDMP changes will have any effect on the ICSR standard being normative. Hugh will be looking at the ICSR schema to see what if any effects there might be. Likely that CPM will go back to ballot in May 2012.
- Datatypes R2 – when models are updated, they automatically go to R2. Should we have any material to support implementers? Guidance should probably be provided by HL7 (core) not by Pharmacy. Should we ask HL7 to do that? Discuss further next week.
