This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
Difference between revisions of "FHIR Workflow Minutes WGM 201601"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with "{{subst::FHIR Workflow Template for Minutes}}") |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | [[Category:FHIR Workflow Minutes]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[Category:WGM Minutes 2016 01-Orlando]] | ||
| + | Return to: [[:Category:WGM Minutes|WGM Minutes]] > [[:Category:WGM Minutes 2016|2016]] > [[:Category:WGM Minutes 2016 01-Orlando|January Orlando]] | ||
| − | |||
__NOTOC__ | __NOTOC__ | ||
| − | =FHIR Workflow | + | =FHIR Workflow WGM session Monday Q3/Q4= |
[[:Category:FHIR Workflow Minutes|Return to FHIR Workflow Minutes]] | [[:Category:FHIR Workflow Minutes|Return to FHIR Workflow Minutes]] | ||
==Agenda== | ==Agenda== | ||
| − | * | + | *Q3: Provide an overview of Workflow discussions to-date, discuss |
| + | *Q4: Walk through Workflow | ||
==Attendees== | ==Attendees== | ||
| − | * | + | *Lloyd McKenzie (chair/partial scribe) |
| − | * | + | *Ewout Kramer (scribe) |
| − | + | *See [[File:2016JanWGMMondayWorkflow.pdf | PDF with full attendee list]] | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| + | ==Mon Q3== | ||
| + | * Lloyd went through the usecases for workflow and issues encountered (see also http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=FHIR_Workflow_Discussion) | ||
| + | * Question: is there a separation of US requirements versus European requirements? Is that considered? A: Scope is international, so about what's going to end up in the core. We will not standardize workflows, but try to designs resources to support exchanging data about workflow. | ||
| + | *Started out with simple scenario of ordering (do this! Ok, done!), then turned into a more generic system with tasks and subtasks and a network of cooperating systems to cover the workflow. Can you cover both without the simple use case getting unnecessarily complex? There is probably going to be multiple ways to do it. | ||
| + | *Is changing of fulfiller in itself an order? Keith +1, Lloyd -1. Lloyd: FHIR allows you to change anything you want as far the spec is concerned, it's about what systems will enforce and what processes are triggered, but that's not part of the spec. | ||
| + | *We discuss how workflow and changes in orders and workflow might be supported by a Task resource which is not necessarily an order, but a Task resulting from an order. In this case, a change of who is executing an order might result in cancelling and sending out new Tasks. | ||
| + | *Lloyd asks: Anyone opposed to renaming xxxxxOrder to xxxxxRequest? This means MedicationOrder becomes MedicationRequest. Is it clear what that means? One speakers thinks PrescriptionRequest is better, but Prescription is already a "request". | ||
| + | *If this kind of confusion starts to exist, we would probably not push too hard, since then consistency would come at the price of confusion | ||
| + | *Isn't "request" going to cause confusion with the lower-level notions in FHIR of a (web) request? Actually, if you look at the names of Resources, the term "Request" is pretty consistently used and does not cause confusion. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Mon Q4== | ||
| + | * Keith Boone walked through workflow examples to date | ||
| + | * Question: How do interested systems know when a Task "of interest" has changed? Answer: Could subscribe, use polling | ||
| + | * Numerous use-cases were raised. Use cases should be added to the Workflow page | ||
| + | * ??? | ||
==Adjournment== | ==Adjournment== | ||
Revision as of 21:53, 13 January 2016
Return to: WGM Minutes > 2016 > January Orlando
FHIR Workflow WGM session Monday Q3/Q4
Return to FHIR Workflow Minutes
Agenda
- Q3: Provide an overview of Workflow discussions to-date, discuss
- Q4: Walk through Workflow
Attendees
- Lloyd McKenzie (chair/partial scribe)
- Ewout Kramer (scribe)
- See File:2016JanWGMMondayWorkflow.pdf
Mon Q3
- Lloyd went through the usecases for workflow and issues encountered (see also http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=FHIR_Workflow_Discussion)
- Question: is there a separation of US requirements versus European requirements? Is that considered? A: Scope is international, so about what's going to end up in the core. We will not standardize workflows, but try to designs resources to support exchanging data about workflow.
- Started out with simple scenario of ordering (do this! Ok, done!), then turned into a more generic system with tasks and subtasks and a network of cooperating systems to cover the workflow. Can you cover both without the simple use case getting unnecessarily complex? There is probably going to be multiple ways to do it.
- Is changing of fulfiller in itself an order? Keith +1, Lloyd -1. Lloyd: FHIR allows you to change anything you want as far the spec is concerned, it's about what systems will enforce and what processes are triggered, but that's not part of the spec.
- We discuss how workflow and changes in orders and workflow might be supported by a Task resource which is not necessarily an order, but a Task resulting from an order. In this case, a change of who is executing an order might result in cancelling and sending out new Tasks.
- Lloyd asks: Anyone opposed to renaming xxxxxOrder to xxxxxRequest? This means MedicationOrder becomes MedicationRequest. Is it clear what that means? One speakers thinks PrescriptionRequest is better, but Prescription is already a "request".
- If this kind of confusion starts to exist, we would probably not push too hard, since then consistency would come at the price of confusion
- Isn't "request" going to cause confusion with the lower-level notions in FHIR of a (web) request? Actually, if you look at the names of Resources, the term "Request" is pretty consistently used and does not cause confusion.
Mon Q4
- Keith Boone walked through workflow examples to date
- Question: How do interested systems know when a Task "of interest" has changed? Answer: Could subscribe, use polling
- Numerous use-cases were raised. Use cases should be added to the Workflow page
- ???
