Difference between revisions of "Vocabulary Quality Assurance Project"
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
=Overview= | =Overview= | ||
==Scope== | ==Scope== | ||
− | Define and communicate consistent set of QA processes for decentralized development of terminology artifacts used across all HL7 product families, coupled with a centralized governance structure. | + | Define and communicate consistent set of QA requirements and describe processes that can be used to implement these requirements for decentralized development of terminology artifacts used across all HL7 product families, coupled with a centralized governance structure. These processes would be followed by all HL7 groups, I.E.: all HL7 standards that reference terminology. This project will not include implementation of the processes documented; the deliverable will be a process document to be implemented via a different project. |
==Need== | ==Need== | ||
− | It has become apparent that the terminology published in HL7 artifacts does not demonstrate the quality and consistency generally required for interoperability among modern HIT systems. In addition, HL7 internal consistency and harmonization has become increasingly difficult due to a lack of standardized quality processes applied to terminology artifacts. This problem has resulted in excessive effort and resource use | + | It has become apparent that the terminology published in HL7 artifacts does not demonstrate the quality and consistency generally required for interoperability among modern HIT systems. In addition, HL7 internal consistency and harmonization has become increasingly difficult due to a lack of standardized quality processes applied to terminology artifacts across the different projects. This problem has resulted in excessive effort and resource use. |
+ | |||
+ | ==Project Risks== | ||
+ | #Significant terminology quality issues currently exist in existing HL7 standards. Different processes will be required to address existing issues. We expect that process to address existing quality issues will in part be derived from the outcome of this project, but cannot dictate our deliverable that is intended to be implemented in current and future HL7 activities. | ||
+ | #Track issues as they are identified, note that process for fixes for existing material will need to be defined later on. In essence, set determining the process for fixing the specific pre-existing issues aside. Spend our time working on a process to avoid future instances of the issue. | ||
=Project Processes= | =Project Processes= | ||
Line 12: | Line 16: | ||
This project will use DropBox as a collaborative document sharing process during the formative draft development process. If you are interested in viewing the current draft please attend the meetings. If you are interested in participating in the editing and review of the drafts, please send a request to get access to the dropbox folder to Rob McClure ( rmcclure AT mdpartners.com ). | This project will use DropBox as a collaborative document sharing process during the formative draft development process. If you are interested in viewing the current draft please attend the meetings. If you are interested in participating in the editing and review of the drafts, please send a request to get access to the dropbox folder to Rob McClure ( rmcclure AT mdpartners.com ). | ||
− | == | + | =Draft list of issues for discussion= |
− | + | # Multi-code system value sets and their use in extensible bindings | |
− | + | # Use of value sets to control better use of null flavor | |
+ | # Value set versioning | ||
+ | # Use of static binding | ||
+ | # Clarify use of immutable value set: ActClassProcedure – good example | ||
+ | # Not just value set – all terminology issues | ||
+ | # V2 table content issues | ||
+ | # Incorrect OID identifier and name of object | ||
+ | # Inconsistency in naming conventions | ||
+ | # Terminology source of truth for artifacts | ||
+ | # Terminology in the context of ballot review | ||
− | + | =Conference Call Schedule and Minutes= | |
'''Calls occur every-other Thursday 1:30 - 3pm ET beginning March 5, 2015''' | '''Calls occur every-other Thursday 1:30 - 3pm ET beginning March 5, 2015''' | ||
Line 37: | Line 50: | ||
## Need to clarify deliverables and timing | ## Need to clarify deliverables and timing | ||
− | + | =Core Documents= | |
# Project Scope Statement [https://db.tt/Qz1Ipfdr HERE] | # Project Scope Statement [https://db.tt/Qz1Ipfdr HERE] | ||
# Draft project goals [https://db.tt/dyarlnUx HERE] | # Draft project goals [https://db.tt/dyarlnUx HERE] |
Revision as of 21:47, 26 May 2015
Project to clarify expected practices and process for WG when using coded vocabulary
Contents
Overview
Scope
Define and communicate consistent set of QA requirements and describe processes that can be used to implement these requirements for decentralized development of terminology artifacts used across all HL7 product families, coupled with a centralized governance structure. These processes would be followed by all HL7 groups, I.E.: all HL7 standards that reference terminology. This project will not include implementation of the processes documented; the deliverable will be a process document to be implemented via a different project.
Need
It has become apparent that the terminology published in HL7 artifacts does not demonstrate the quality and consistency generally required for interoperability among modern HIT systems. In addition, HL7 internal consistency and harmonization has become increasingly difficult due to a lack of standardized quality processes applied to terminology artifacts across the different projects. This problem has resulted in excessive effort and resource use.
Project Risks
- Significant terminology quality issues currently exist in existing HL7 standards. Different processes will be required to address existing issues. We expect that process to address existing quality issues will in part be derived from the outcome of this project, but cannot dictate our deliverable that is intended to be implemented in current and future HL7 activities.
- Track issues as they are identified, note that process for fixes for existing material will need to be defined later on. In essence, set determining the process for fixing the specific pre-existing issues aside. Spend our time working on a process to avoid future instances of the issue.
Project Processes
This project will use DropBox as a collaborative document sharing process during the formative draft development process. If you are interested in viewing the current draft please attend the meetings. If you are interested in participating in the editing and review of the drafts, please send a request to get access to the dropbox folder to Rob McClure ( rmcclure AT mdpartners.com ).
Draft list of issues for discussion
- Multi-code system value sets and their use in extensible bindings
- Use of value sets to control better use of null flavor
- Value set versioning
- Use of static binding
- Clarify use of immutable value set: ActClassProcedure – good example
- Not just value set – all terminology issues
- V2 table content issues
- Incorrect OID identifier and name of object
- Inconsistency in naming conventions
- Terminology source of truth for artifacts
- Terminology in the context of ballot review
Conference Call Schedule and Minutes
Calls occur every-other Thursday 1:30 - 3pm ET beginning March 5, 2015
Call Info: Standard Vocabulary phone line: Phone: +1 770-657-9270, Participant Code: 598745
Webmeeting Info: Please click on the link below to join the Mikogo session https://go.mikogo.com/?sp=&sid=661689818
If the above link does not work, you can follow these steps instead to join a session:
- Go to http://go.mikogo.com
- Enter the Session ID: 661689818
- Enter your name
- Click "Join Session"
Agenda for next meeting April 4
- Continue work on creating the PSS content
- Plan is to use a Peer Review Process deliverable
- Need to clarify deliverables and timing
Core Documents
Minutes documents
2015-02-05_Minutes 2015-02-12_Minutes 2015-03-05_Minutes 2015-03-19_Minutes