This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
<meta name="googlebot" content="noindex">

Difference between revisions of "2013-11-12 User Group Task Force Conf Call"

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "==Agenda== * Refine proposed draft definition of and HL7 User Group. * Narrow pilot User Group selection down to two choices ==Attendees== * John Hatem (chair), Nathan Bunker,...")
 
Line 1: Line 1:
 
==Agenda==
 
==Agenda==
* Refine proposed draft definition of and HL7 User Group.
+
* Create Mission and Charter
* Narrow pilot User Group selection down to two choices
+
* Identify HUG pilot focus area
  
 
==Attendees==
 
==Attendees==
* John Hatem (chair), Nathan Bunker, Mark McDougal(scribe), Karen Van Hentenryck
+
* John Hatem (chair), Bonnie McAllister, Ken McCaslin, Mark McDougal(scribe), Karen Van Hentenryck
  
 
==Minutes/Conclusions Reached==
 
==Minutes/Conclusions Reached==
* Participants worked on refining a draft definition of an HL7 User Group that John provided.  After much discussion and input from others, the updated version is provided below.
+
* We have created a definition for HL7 Users Group (HUG):
**A group of HL7 users (including both HL7 members and non members) with common interests in implementing, rather than creating, one or more HL7 standards. User groups will set their agendas based on common interests that may include learning about or defining best practices to simplify and reduce the cost of implementation, exploration and identification of gaps in current standards that prohibit effective implementation, sharing lessons learned, hosting connectathons, learning about available HL7 enabled products, etc.
+
** A group of HL7 users (including both HL7 members and non-members) with common interests in implementing, rather than creating, one or more HL7 standards. HL7 User Groups will set their own agendas that may include common interests such as learning about or defining best practices to simplify and reduce the cost of implementation, exploration and identification of gaps in current standards that prohibit effective implementation, sharing lessons learned, hosting connectathons, learning about available HL7 enabled products, or other activities as deemed appropriate.  
  
* Nathan suggested that the user communities should determine what they will work on in the UG.  He added that the UG will not develop new standards, though they may suggest areas. 
+
* Create Mission and Charter – this work should include addressing surveying what other user groups are doing that may overlap with our intended HL7 UG.  John referenced Mark’s earlier notes that provided three examples of alternatives for such a UG purpose:
 +
** Education and support for implementers
 +
** Identifying gaps or needs for more standards development
 +
** Nurturing a community of users organized by standards, topic or WG
  
* John indicated that there ought to be a an effort to determine measurable success factors.
+
* Identify focus of the HUG pilot - HUG candidates include:
 +
** Mobile Health
 +
** Clinical Research
 +
** Structured Documents
 +
** Immunization
 +
** Meaningful Use
 +
** FHIR implementations
 +
** Laboratory
  
* John added that one possible community of users for a users group may be from the immunization space.   
+
* John asked how should we select the group for the pilot UG?  Bonnie responded that we need to engage the group candidates to learn with groups are most interested and have the bandwidth to launch and support the pilot HUG.   
  
* John noted that the pilot community needs someone to take ownership and lead the group.
+
* Ken suggested that we pick one group, and then we can regroup and re-launch if the first group struggles.  Ken added that he would support starting with immunization group since they appear to have a lot of activity and interest.  Karen and Bonnie also support this group as our pilot group.  
  
* Mark noted that the success of the pilot user group will likely have significant influence on the Board’s consideration to expand the scope of user groups.  Therefore, he suggested that we choose a community that we view is hot and one that is likely to engage enough participants and leaders to ensure success.
+
* Ken suggests that we explore engaging a CDC immunization expert to endorse this HUG and possibly help lead the charge.  
  
* John indicated that “hot” community should not be the only factor in choosing the pilot community.
+
* Mobile Health was identified as the likely back up group.
  
* Nathan added that the pilot community should be a relevant focus that may also be a new areaHe added that we should identify a short list of user group communities for consideration.  
+
* Ken added that we should plan now to launch them at HIMSSJohn responded that he is supportive of rolling it out at HIMSS, but suggests that we limit it to one group and not two.  
  
* John offered a few possible communities to consider:
+
* Next steps for finalizing immunization as the pilot group. 
** Immunization
+
** Speak with CDC and other immunization leaders to confirm interest
** US realm C-CDA
+
** Brainstorm on framework parameters
** FHIR
+
*** Virtual versus face to face
 +
*** Governance
 +
**** Chair and co-chair
 +
*** HUG membership dues versus registration fees
 +
** HUG Needs
 +
*** UG wiki page to house agendas
 +
*** UG listserv (perhaps with a designated listserv moderator)
 +
*** HUG ambassador guidebook that provides insight to other communities with an interest in creating other HUGs
 +
*** Social networking channels such as LinkedIn
 +
*** Meetings
 +
**** Virtual
 +
***** Conference calls
 +
***** Gotomeeting
 +
**** Face to face meeting one per year
 +
*** Election support for electing chair and co-chair
 +
*** Meeting support
 +
**** Registration with a different badge
 +
**** Logistics (F&B, AV, meeting room)
 +
**** Assume at an HL7 WGM
 +
*** Limited to one day meeting - perhaps on Thursday or Friday of WGM week (Nathan suggests convening the UG meeting on Friday)
 +
*** UG attendees would not be eligible to attend WGM tutorials or WG meetings
 +
** Ken suggested that we also consider enabling local subgroups to form by region.
 +
** Finances
 +
*** User group dues pricing
 +
**** HL7 members pay no fee to join the HL7 UG
 +
**** Nonmembers of HL7 pay $100 to join the HL7 UG
 +
*** User group meeting registration fees
 +
**** Discussed a full day registration meeting fee of $200 for HUG members and $300 for UG nonmembers that also provides one year of HUG membership
 +
 
 +
* Identify the metrics we want to use to measure success / progress of the UG pilot.
 +
** Satisfaction survey
 +
** Growth in number of HUG membership
  
* Nathan asked if we anticipate creating an HL7 UG in the Boston areaJohn responded that a decision has not yet been made on whether the UGs would be virtual and/or regional.  
+
* John noted that he did not think that the HUGs will become revenue producers for HL7.  Mark added that as the HUG communities gel and become active, it will help HL7 membership retention rates.
  
* Summary thoughts on key components of an HL7 User Group: 
+
* Next steps
** Virtual support to include listservs and online presence at HL7 website
+
** Mark will draft a one page description of the HUG.
** Formalize pilot user group meeting(s) at WGMs starting in May 2014
+
** John will discuss Immunization UG with Nathan and Rob.
*** Limited to one day meeting, perhaps on Thursday or Friday of WGM week (Nathan suggests convening the UG meeting on Friday)
 
*** If UG was hosted at the same location as a WGM, the UG attendees would not be eligible to attend WGM tutorials or WG meetings
 
** User group dues pricing
 
*** HL7 members pay no fee to join the HL7 UG
 
*** Nonmembers of HL7 pay $100 to join the HL7 UG
 
*** User group meeting registration fees (for face to face annual meeting)
 
** Discussed a full day registration meeting fee of $200 for UG members and $300 for UG nonmembers which provides them with a one year UG membership
 
** We will also need to discuss governance of such HL7 UGs.
 

Revision as of 23:47, 15 January 2014

Agenda

  • Create Mission and Charter
  • Identify HUG pilot focus area

Attendees

  • John Hatem (chair), Bonnie McAllister, Ken McCaslin, Mark McDougal(scribe), Karen Van Hentenryck

Minutes/Conclusions Reached

  • We have created a definition for HL7 Users Group (HUG):
    • A group of HL7 users (including both HL7 members and non-members) with common interests in implementing, rather than creating, one or more HL7 standards. HL7 User Groups will set their own agendas that may include common interests such as learning about or defining best practices to simplify and reduce the cost of implementation, exploration and identification of gaps in current standards that prohibit effective implementation, sharing lessons learned, hosting connectathons, learning about available HL7 enabled products, or other activities as deemed appropriate.
  • Create Mission and Charter – this work should include addressing surveying what other user groups are doing that may overlap with our intended HL7 UG. John referenced Mark’s earlier notes that provided three examples of alternatives for such a UG purpose:
    • Education and support for implementers
    • Identifying gaps or needs for more standards development
    • Nurturing a community of users organized by standards, topic or WG
  • Identify focus of the HUG pilot - HUG candidates include:
    • Mobile Health
    • Clinical Research
    • Structured Documents
    • Immunization
    • Meaningful Use
    • FHIR implementations
    • Laboratory
  • John asked how should we select the group for the pilot UG? Bonnie responded that we need to engage the group candidates to learn with groups are most interested and have the bandwidth to launch and support the pilot HUG.
  • Ken suggested that we pick one group, and then we can regroup and re-launch if the first group struggles. Ken added that he would support starting with immunization group since they appear to have a lot of activity and interest. Karen and Bonnie also support this group as our pilot group.
  • Ken suggests that we explore engaging a CDC immunization expert to endorse this HUG and possibly help lead the charge.
  • Mobile Health was identified as the likely back up group.
  • Ken added that we should plan now to launch them at HIMSS. John responded that he is supportive of rolling it out at HIMSS, but suggests that we limit it to one group and not two.
  • Next steps for finalizing immunization as the pilot group.
    • Speak with CDC and other immunization leaders to confirm interest
    • Brainstorm on framework parameters
      • Virtual versus face to face
      • Governance
        • Chair and co-chair
      • HUG membership dues versus registration fees
    • HUG Needs
      • UG wiki page to house agendas
      • UG listserv (perhaps with a designated listserv moderator)
      • HUG ambassador guidebook that provides insight to other communities with an interest in creating other HUGs
      • Social networking channels such as LinkedIn
      • Meetings
        • Virtual
          • Conference calls
          • Gotomeeting
        • Face to face meeting one per year
      • Election support for electing chair and co-chair
      • Meeting support
        • Registration with a different badge
        • Logistics (F&B, AV, meeting room)
        • Assume at an HL7 WGM
      • Limited to one day meeting - perhaps on Thursday or Friday of WGM week (Nathan suggests convening the UG meeting on Friday)
      • UG attendees would not be eligible to attend WGM tutorials or WG meetings
    • Ken suggested that we also consider enabling local subgroups to form by region.
    • Finances
      • User group dues pricing
        • HL7 members pay no fee to join the HL7 UG
        • Nonmembers of HL7 pay $100 to join the HL7 UG
      • User group meeting registration fees
        • Discussed a full day registration meeting fee of $200 for HUG members and $300 for UG nonmembers that also provides one year of HUG membership
  • Identify the metrics we want to use to measure success / progress of the UG pilot.
    • Satisfaction survey
    • Growth in number of HUG membership
  • John noted that he did not think that the HUGs will become revenue producers for HL7. Mark added that as the HUG communities gel and become active, it will help HL7 membership retention rates.
  • Next steps
    • Mark will draft a one page description of the HUG.
    • John will discuss Immunization UG with Nathan and Rob.