2017-07-05 FMG concall

HL7 TSC FMG Meeting Minutes Location: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/279790597 (voice and screen)		Date: 2017--07-05 Time: 4:00 PM U.S. Eastern
Chair:		Note taker(s): Anne W.

Quorum = chair + 4			yes/no
Co chairs		David Hay	x	Lloyd McKenzie
ex-officio	x	Lorraine Constable (FGB)		Dave Shaver (FGB)	.	Wayne Kubick, CTO

Members		Members		Members		Observers/Guests
x	Hans Buitendijk	x	Brian Postlethwaite	x	Paul Knapp	x	Anne W., scribe
x	Josh Mandel	x	John Moehrke	x	Brian Pech
x	Grahame Grieve					x	Christol Green, Richard Ettema

Agenda

• Roll Call
• Agenda Check
• Minutes from 2017-06-28_FMG_concall
• Action items
  • Lloyd to put together a draft template for IG proposals and clean up some of the profile proposal template.
  • Brian will draft Connectathon publicity email and send to David for review
  • Anne to discuss PSS update with Dave re: adding FHIR version to PSS
  • David to send FMG comments to Patient Care re: Revised Pharmacist Care Plan
  • Paul to review STU FMM reationale and discuss with SGB
  • David to check with Simon on Connectathon in China
• Review Items
  • CatalogEntry Resource Proposal
  • Any updated Connectathon proposals?
• Discussion
• Reports
  • Connectathon management (David/Brian)
  • FGB –
  • MnM –
  • FMG Liaisons –
• Process management
  • Ballot Planning
  • Ballot content review and QA process FHIR QA Guidelines
• AOB (Any Other Business)

Minutes

• Roll Call
  • Guests: Christol Green, Richard Ettema, Claude Nanjo
• Agenda Check
  • MOTION to approve: Paul/Brian Pech
  • VOTE: All in favor
• Minutes from 2017-06-28_FMG_concall
  • MOTION to accept: John/Grahame
  • VOTE: All in favor
• Action items
  • Lloyd to put together a draft template for IG proposals and clean up some of the profile proposal template.
    • Add for next week
  • Brian will draft Connectathon publicity email and send to David for review
    • Complete
  • Anne to discuss PSS update with Dave re: adding FHIR version to PSS
    • Complete. It has been added to the list for updates to the template
  • David to send FMG comments to Patient Care re: Revised Pharmacist Care Plan
    • Add for next week
  • Paul to review STU FMM rationale and discuss with SGB
    • Add for next week.
  • David to check with Simon on Connectathon in China
    • Add for next week
• Review Items
  • CatalogEntry Resource Proposal
    • Lorraine and Claude here to discuss and describe intention behind proposal. Represents context for a catalog item; addresses important requirements for catalogs. Lloyd: There will need to be a resource that represents the lab test definition, and this proposal is not that. The lab test definition would hold the relationship context. Discussion over that assertion and how things fit together. Lloyd is concerned that the boundaries around what is part of the cataloged item and what is part of the catalog entry is fuzzy. The notion of catalog entry as having a distinct status from the cataloged thing is a concern. Lorraine: Pharmacy has told us that they have a separate concept around whether the medication has a status that is orderable or not. Lloyd: Not clear if a status of orderable should live outside the resource itself. Group reviews content from OO. Lloyd: This feels like it should be captured in the base resource. Claude: That may pollute the resource itself. ***Discussion over the relationship between the identifier and the catalog entry. Lorraine: Hearing that FMG would like to see the draft resources fleshed out before they approve the proposals. Lloyd: What I would like to see in the final draft resource is very clear boundaries about what info can go into catalog entry and what can go into the cataloged resources. Claude notes that they will update to reflect the latest set of requirements. Lloyd concerned about overlap and relationship to List.Entry; need those questions answered to properly evaluate. Also, from a computable perspective, Lloyd had assumed things like formularies and lab tests would be handled by the List resource. Composition is very much about human readability and navigability. Lorraine notes that is a prominent characteristic of catalogs. Claude: If you group items into sections, an entry could appear in multiple sections. That is why CatalogEntry is a reference. You could always have metadata groupings, but typical structure for catalogs is not a flat list.
    • Group reviews Catalog-to-Composition comparison. Lloyd: Get the notion that you can have catalog documents which are a view on a catalog that have navigation, etc. Wondering about a design where catalog is a list, and the metadata about the entries only shows up once. Claude: When you use list, it is actually more complex. What we are trying to do is keep the definitional items as clean as possible. Lloyd: My concern is imposing the structure and overhead of the document framework on the use cases that don't want or need it. Lorraine: Why not just send a bundle of catalog entries? Lloyd: the notion of catalog is still relevant - you still want to know if a list of medications is still in a particular formulary. Paul: Wouldn't that be expressed through the catalog entries rather than the medications? Lloyd: As things stand now you could solve the issue through List. Claude: One possibility is to use a common structure for List and Composition which allows entries to be either top level or to be contained within sections, and use a common structure for both. If you merge them into one and relax the subject, you have a common structure. Lloyd: Sections don't actually add any meaning to the content. Nervous about the notion of catalogs having sections. Paul: Catalog has a complex structure; documents do too. I don't think of catalog being a document.
    • Grahame: Concerned about the processes around the catalog. the right way forward is to recognize the business requirements and that there is controversy over how to go forward - need to test it at a Connectathon. Lorraine: That's fair. Claude: In order to try something at a Connectathon, we need a draft of the resource. Lloyd: You can create a draft proposal. Do think carefully about relationships between items as opposed to entries, and be careful of relationships between entries. Think carefully about how the information would be used. Keep in mind that it's entirely possible to have multiple instances that are talking about the same kind of thing that have slightly different context. When you're talking about medications or lab definitions or whatever, don't feel like you can have only one item; you can have multiple items talking about the same thing.
    • They will come back with the next draft for discussion. Will look at doing Connectathon in January.
      • MOTION to tentatively endorse the creation of these resources for use in exercise at Connectathon; will look at approving resources after that: Grahame/Brian Post
      • VOTE: All in favor
  • Any updated Connectathon proposals?
    • Implantables still not done
    • Grahame will send out blog post next week inviting people to participate
    • Questions on whether or not there is enough participation for PATCH and GraphQL
• Adjourned at 5:13 PM Eastern

Next Steps

Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)

Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items 2017-07-12 FMG concall

Back to FHIR_Management_Group

© 2017 Health Level Seven® International