October 30, 2012 Security Working Group Conference Call

Security Working Group Meeting

• Meeting Information

Back to Security Main Page

Attendees

• Bill Braithwaite
• John Carter
• Kathleen Connor
• Reed D. Gelzer
• Adrienne James
• Paul L Petronelli
• Harry Rhodes
• Arnie Rosenthal
• Serafina Versaggi
• Richard Thoreson CBCC Cochair

Back to Security Main Page

Agenda

1. (05 min) Roll Call, Approve October 23, 2012 Security Working Group Conference Call Security Working Group Conference Call Minutes] & Accept Agenda
2. (20 min) HCS Ballot Update – Mike Davis
3. (20 min) S&P Ontology Ballot Update - John Carter
4. (10 min) TBD Topic
5. (05 min) Other Business, Agenda for Next call, Action Items, and Wrap Up

Minutes

• RE: Approval of Minutes and Agenda – There was no cochair so we held an informal discussion call.
• RE: HCS Ballot Update – Kathleen reported that the Notices of Intent for Ballot for both HCS and Ontology have been submitted, as well as the Nov. Harmonization proposals.
• RE: S&P Ontology Ballot Update – John Carter reported that they are recruiting Tony to help prepare the ballot for January.
• RE: RM-ES and Security WGs areas of shared metadata scope - Group discussed need for interoperable records management and security metadata, use of provenance and integrity completion, confidence, and data alteration. Some of those concerns are already supported by HL7 v.2 and v.3 with classes for author, data enterer, and informant, and class attributes such as status, uncertainty code, and DocumentCompletion, as well as mechanisms for tracking amendments such as snap-shot and update mode. It would be helpful to map those to RM-ES functional requirements related to information exchange.

In addition, RM-ES WG may want to review the current records management standards documented in HL7 v.2 Chapter 9 and HL7 v.3 Medical Records Domain to see what they can leverage for their profile. Arnie noted that there is a sophisticated body of work on provenance tracking that should be considered. Inclusion of that work would be helpful for ensuring the semantic interoperability and ability of provenance enabled systems to consume the provenance metadata used for information exchange. Reed provided a number of examples where use of information exchange concepts like “legal authenticator” are used differently and perhaps inappropriately, and noted the need for some means to enforce a standard definition and use of these concepts especially given their importance to payers and to initiatives such as edMS. Harry and Kathleen discussed the manner in which CDA R2 can convey [0...*] legal authenticator, author, informant, and data enterer at the document level, as well as allow [0...*] different author and informant at the Section and Entry levels. What seems to be lacking is the ability to provide author/informant information about entry level classes that are being reported “second-hand”. This would be helpful for tracking the entities from which the CDA entry authors received the entry information being conveyed when the entry author or informant are not the originators.

• RE: Other Business, Agenda for Next call, Action Items, and Wrap Up

Participants agreed that it would be helpful have further discussions about metadata that support record management and security. Meeting adjourned at 2:00 PM Eastern

Action Items

• RE: Kathleen to fix links to Mike’s HCS presentation
• RE: Adrienne and Kathleen to collaborate on minutes

Reference Material from Call

• File:Security Observation Vocabulary.png

  Diagram of the components of a healthcare security labeling system

Back to Security Main Page