This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
Difference between revisions of "Negation Requirements Project Minutes 8 June 2016"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with " <!-- LOOK FOR THE APPROPRIATE SECTION ****** TO ENTER INFORMATION--> Back to Negation Minutes ==Minutes== ===Meeting Information=== {|border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspac...") |
|||
Line 114: | Line 114: | ||
## OK | ## OK | ||
## Perhaps this should support different levels of conformance. | ## Perhaps this should support different levels of conformance. | ||
− | ## Add here a preference to use the term "negation" advisedly, and to distinguish domain semantics where possible. (I.e., where not designing DL rules, as in SCT TIG.) | + | ## Add here a preference to use the term "negation" advisedly, and to distinguish domain semantics where possible. (I.e., where not designing DL rules, as in SCT TIG 7.8.2.4.7.) |
− | ## | + | ## Add point that the 'no allergy' and 'no allergy to x' are the use case driving this principle |
− | |||
===Meeting Outcomes=== | ===Meeting Outcomes=== |
Revision as of 17:15, 8 June 2016
Back to Negation Minutes
Minutes
Meeting Information
HL7 PC-CIMI-POC Meeting Minutes Location: PC call line |
Date: 2016-06-08 Time: 11:00-12:00 ET | ||
Facilitator | Jay Lyle | Note taker(s) | Jay Lyle |
Attendee | Name | Affiliation
| |
y | Jay Lyle | JP Systems | |
y | Richard Esmond | ||
y | Gerard Freriks | ||
y | Rob Hausam | ||
y | Serafina Versaggi | ||
y | Cynthia Barton | NLM | |
Karl Poterack | |||
Agenda
Agenda Topics
- . status
- . review of draft principles - http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=Negation_Principles
- . review of requirements statement - http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=Negation_Requirements_Statement
- . alternate proposals for semantic model, including choice of finding vs observable (use cases spreadsheet on site)
Minutes
Minutes/Conclusions Reached:
- Status: PSS still not approved. Asking MnM for participation
- Additions suggested for Glossary page: modifier, post-coordinated
- Principles - topics
- We need to define what the effect of these principles should be. Perhaps we should convert them into conformance statements and ballot them.
- Principles
- OK. CQI may be responsible for how to handle these "empty query" negations, but we should at least stipulate that they not be recorded in a way that might be confused with actual negation.
- OK.
- OK
- Perhaps this should support different levels of conformance.
- Add here a preference to use the term "negation" advisedly, and to distinguish domain semantics where possible. (I.e., where not designing DL rules, as in SCT TIG 7.8.2.4.7.)
- Add point that the 'no allergy' and 'no allergy to x' are the use case driving this principle
Meeting Outcomes
Actions
|
Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items
|
© 2012 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved.