Difference between revisions of "2017-09-19 TermInfo Project Call"
| (4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
<!-- ******** CHANGE Date and Time ON NEXT LINE **********************--> | <!-- ******** CHANGE Date and Time ON NEXT LINE **********************--> | ||
| − | | width="50%" colspan="2" align="left" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Date: 2017- | + | | width="50%" colspan="2" align="left" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Date: 2017-09-19'''<br/> '''Time: 4:00-5:00pm ET (20:00-21:00 UTC)''' |
|- | |- | ||
<!-- ******** CHANGE chair and scribe ON NEXT LINES *******************--> | <!-- ******** CHANGE chair and scribe ON NEXT LINES *******************--> | ||
| Line 96: | Line 96: | ||
*'''Minutes''' (as available) | *'''Minutes''' (as available) | ||
*'''Review action items''' (send any updates in advance!) | *'''Review action items''' (send any updates in advance!) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Peter asked about the San Diego discussion on the FHIR Vital Signs profile and issues of required LOINC coding. Rob gave an overview of the discussion at the WGM. OO and FHIR are planning to continue with the Vital Signs profile as previously proposed. The Health Care Devices WG seems to be more amenable to this now, including the LOINC coding requirement. The devices themselves are not expected to provide the LOINC code, but this should be done by the time the data hits a FHIR endpoint. This coding can be done in the gateway software (Brian Reinhold has already coded this). The gateway software can include the LOINC mappings for known devices at the time of release, and will plan to add a code for "unknown" for new devices that the gateway software does not recognize. Showed the 11073 codes in the NIST RTM Rosetta tool: https://rtmms.nist.gov/rtmms/index.htm#!home | ||
| + | |||
| + | Linda asked for thoughts about the mandatory LOINC codes for the vital signs. Daniel said this is a struggle for non-LOINC using countries - there is no support for those LOINC codes. Rob suggested gathering documentation of the issues that people are having with this. Peter suggested they would consider these as "key patient indicators". A FHIR tracker has been submitted for a "patient characteristics" profile - this includes blood type (not recalling the other items). So there may be additional required profiles in the future. | ||
| + | |||
| + | HL7 via the HTA has decided not to pursue the submission of concepts for the SNOMED CT "free set". The Internation Patient Ssummary (IPS) submission was felt by SNOMED Int. to be too large, and the process is felt by HTA to at present be unworkable. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Linda: Mandating LOINC could be for US realm. Rob: FHIR is attempting to achieve international interoperability with this limited set of vital signs data. Sharing may be by patients, on mobile devices. Daniel: | ||
| + | |||
| + | FHIR profiling discussion | ||
| + | |||
**Update TermInfo Wiki and HL7 TermInfo project site information - some progress being made | **Update TermInfo Wiki and HL7 TermInfo project site information - some progress being made | ||
*'''Update on status of SNOMED CT - FHIR collaboration''' | *'''Update on status of SNOMED CT - FHIR collaboration''' | ||
| Line 119: | Line 130: | ||
*Future item: Review and update TermInfo PSS | *Future item: Review and update TermInfo PSS | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
Action: | Action: | ||
investigate profile capabilities for multiple bindings and/or slicing on code system | investigate profile capabilities for multiple bindings and/or slicing on code system | ||
| − | tooling vs. specification capabilities | + | *tooling vs. specification capabilities |
| − | can binding strength be specified using the profile tooling? | + | *can binding strength be specified using the profile tooling? |
| − | how will we collaborate on the profile in terms of multiple vs. single author | + | *how will we collaborate on the profile in terms of multiple vs. single author |
*GitHub? how to set up | *GitHub? how to set up | ||
| − | do we need a Forge and spreadsheet strategy - one or both? | + | *do we need a Forge and spreadsheet strategy - one or both? |
| − | SNOMED CT FHIR meeting Bratislava - Tuesday 17 October 9:00 - 12:00 | + | Note: SNOMED CT FHIR meeting in Bratislava - Tuesday 17 October 9:00 - 12:00 |
==Supporting Information== | ==Supporting Information== | ||
Latest revision as of 18:30, 31 October 2017
Return to TermInfo Project Meeting Agendas and Minutes
Contents
Meeting Information
| TermInfo Project Conference Call Web meeting (phone number are available for call-in if needed): |
Date: 2017-09-19 Time: 4:00-5:00pm ET (20:00-21:00 UTC) | ||
| Chair | Rob Hausam | Scribe | Rob Hausam |
| Attendee | Name | Affiliation
| |
| Rob Hausam | Hausam Consulting LLC | ||
| Linda Bird | |||
| Peter Jordan | |||
| Andrew Perry | |||
| Daniel Karlsson | |||
| Ron Van Duyne | |||
Apologies:
Agenda
Agenda Topics
- Announcements
- Agenda review
- Minutes (as available)
- Review action items (send any updates in advance!)
Peter asked about the San Diego discussion on the FHIR Vital Signs profile and issues of required LOINC coding. Rob gave an overview of the discussion at the WGM. OO and FHIR are planning to continue with the Vital Signs profile as previously proposed. The Health Care Devices WG seems to be more amenable to this now, including the LOINC coding requirement. The devices themselves are not expected to provide the LOINC code, but this should be done by the time the data hits a FHIR endpoint. This coding can be done in the gateway software (Brian Reinhold has already coded this). The gateway software can include the LOINC mappings for known devices at the time of release, and will plan to add a code for "unknown" for new devices that the gateway software does not recognize. Showed the 11073 codes in the NIST RTM Rosetta tool: https://rtmms.nist.gov/rtmms/index.htm#!home
Linda asked for thoughts about the mandatory LOINC codes for the vital signs. Daniel said this is a struggle for non-LOINC using countries - there is no support for those LOINC codes. Rob suggested gathering documentation of the issues that people are having with this. Peter suggested they would consider these as "key patient indicators". A FHIR tracker has been submitted for a "patient characteristics" profile - this includes blood type (not recalling the other items). So there may be additional required profiles in the future.
HL7 via the HTA has decided not to pursue the submission of concepts for the SNOMED CT "free set". The Internation Patient Ssummary (IPS) submission was felt by SNOMED Int. to be too large, and the process is felt by HTA to at present be unworkable.
Linda: Mandating LOINC could be for US realm. Rob: FHIR is attempting to achieve international interoperability with this limited set of vital signs data. Sharing may be by patients, on mobile devices. Daniel:
FHIR profiling discussion
- Update TermInfo Wiki and HL7 TermInfo project site information - some progress being made
- Update on status of SNOMED CT - FHIR collaboration
- No expectation now of funding from NLM for HL7 work
- Planned meeting in Bratislava
- Updates from San Diego WGM
- No TermInfo quarter (no available time and no remote access on Monday Q4)
- Interoperability Issues using code value pairs in FHIR
- Item from OO on guidance for use of Observation code and value
- GF11318_guidance.txt.rh.html
- Are the bindings correct?
- What about case #3 for "value omitted"
- Should allow or disallow?
- Require dataAbsentReason?
- Include this as part of the TermInfo FHIR SNOMED CT profile?
- Item from OO on guidance for use of Observation code and value
- Questions from Andrew and Linda
- FHIR SNOMED CT profile/IG
- Initial draft attempt at profile in Forge
- Review and continue to develop
- SNOMED profile
- Linda - consider mandating SNOMED in code plus additional terminologies (i.e. LOINC)
- Future item: Review and update TermInfo PSS
Action:
investigate profile capabilities for multiple bindings and/or slicing on code system
- tooling vs. specification capabilities
- can binding strength be specified using the profile tooling?
- how will we collaborate on the profile in terms of multiple vs. single author
- GitHub? how to set up
- do we need a Forge and spreadsheet strategy - one or both?
Note: SNOMED CT FHIR meeting in Bratislava - Tuesday 17 October 9:00 - 12:00
Supporting Information
Minutes
Prior Action Item Follow-up
Adjourn
Adjourned at hh:mm am/pm Eastern (hh:mm UTC).
Meeting Outcomes
| Actions
|
Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items
|
© 2012 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved.
