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

20170613 US Realm SC Call

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

back to US_Realm_Steering_Committee
back to US_Realm_Steering_Committee_Conference_Calls

US Realm Steering Committee Call Agenda/Minutes


Date: 2017-06-13
Time: 1 PM Eastern
Co-Chairs Ed/Brett Note taker(s) Anne
Attendee / Name
x Calvin Beebe Keith Boone x Hans Buitendijk
Lorraine Constable Johnathan Coleman x Ed Hammond
x Tony Julian x Paul Knapp x Austin Kreisler
x Brett Marquard Ken McCaslin Nancy Orvis
Brian Pech x Wayne Kubick Christol Green
Sandra Stuart . Pat Van Dyke x Craig Parker
x Danielle Friend x Eric Haas x Jenni Syed
Steve Posnak . David Susanto .
Visitor/ Name
Quorum: Chair + 7



  • Agenda review
  • Review notes from 20170606_US_Realm_SC_Call
  • Action Items
    • Brett to rework path to US Core diagram for group review
  • Approval items:
    • Eye Care on FHIR PSS
      • Hans reviews PSS with group. Intent is to create FHIR artifacts at a universal level, so OO wasn't going to run it past US Realm; however, some suggested that it should be run past US Realm because C-CDA profiles are US realm. Trying to look at the data that is relevant for eye care summaries using FHIR. Austin: The scope clearly only identifies C-CDA as the source of requirements. The scope itself doesn't speak to universality. No other source of requirements are listed in the scope. Hans: If there is clarification that C-CDA is one of the sources as well as other sources, would that help? Austin: Yes, it needs something concrete other than just C-CDA. Ed: Is there anybody international participating? Hans: IFA (Germany). Hans: There is a C-CDA that already exists that can reflect the US requirements, but no international published endorsed document reflecting international requirements. Hans will adjust project scope. Ed asks if the project will exist in FHIR only or will it exist in CDA and FHIR? Hans: C-CDA constructs are going to be express able in FHIR so you don't have to maintain both. Austin notes they need to clearly identify what's being talked about in 3.h. - Project Dependencies. Discussion over what will be produced - a universal profile as well as a US-constrained profile? Hans will get clarification from OO. The question is - if the outcome of followup is that it is strictly universal, does it need to come back to this group? Or does this group want to be a cosponsor of the project to stay informed? Or if the feedback from OO is that US profile and universal profile will be produced, it definitely needs to come back here. Ed: For me, pushing some of these into universal realm expands the scope of some of these standards into a broader setting. Discussion over whether there has been outreach to other realms. Hans: No known outreach to international council - just within project. Ed: A standard component of International Council should be making them aware of US Realm projects and finding out if there is interest in being involved. Should be a standing topic.
      • Based on feedback from OO, is there interest from US Realm if this is clearly universal?
      • ACTION: Hans agrees to bring back results from OO discussion next week
  • Brett edited the steps to US core candidacy; group reviews. Added steps if it's already published - pilot, propose candidate for US core to US Realm Steering Committee, Submit STU update or ballot. Ed asks for explanation to be included for what the purpose and requirements are for being a candidate for US Core. Brett: Right now it's defined by the common clinical data set and US requirements. Ed: We don't want to restrict only to Argonauts; we need some degree of harmonization. Need to move towards a common set. Brett will add definitional slide back in to this deck. Calvin: Is there a common use case that US Core solves? Brett displays what we had described previously. Discussion over future of what is included and how to determine. Suggestion that core profiles shouldn't solve everything. Craig notes that the goal should be to get the common parts represented and then people can individualize. Can't cover all of medicine at once. Ed: Data sharing is going to be a huge initiative and we need to be collecting what people need. Discussion over similarities/differences in health and healthcare across globe and how it affects interoperability. Brett displays four degrees of profiling.


Meeting Outcomes

Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items

© 2017 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved