20180227 OO FHIR conCall
|HL7 OO on FHIR (for Orders and Observations)
Call in details:
02:00 PM (Eastern Time, GMT -04 DST)
|Quorum = chair + 4 yes|
- 1.1 Agenda
- 1.2 Stopped here will pick up on Thursday
- Roll Call
We have 2 outstanding Block Votes ( see prior emails ) which we will vote on on Thursday.
Here is an oveview of our trackers categorized by group and ordered by priority all need a vote on prior to Ballot:
- 3 group F = Focal subject trackers critical
- 2 Group I critical and breaking change (rob is leading this since a vocab issue) require Community Consultation
- 3 ready for vote (hoping on the OO on FHIR call)
- 6 Block vote 2 not critical - vote on Thursday
- 3 Block vote 3 one critical - vote on Thursday ( includes workflow pattern for Observation which is critical but not substantive.)
- Another Group of 2 Device Trackers one of which was referred to the UDI call to disposition. If we can dispose of it that would be great.
- Another group of several catalog, and BRP issues ( SpecimenDefinition, ObservationDefinition,BRP, EntryItem) Which I have referred to the respectiver subcommittees to disposition separately. These have lower priority and will be handled last and may need to be deferred if we run out of time on Thursday
- 2 group D deferred - this group will grow to include all the deferred items.
Group F : Observation Subject or FocalSubject = Reference(Any)
- Substantive change to scope of Observation
- driven by modelers and profilers not implementers
- sought implementer feedback but no substantive feedback received
- See Zulip chat for community discussion
- Proposal: OK I am going to present a couple of options to the OO WG either tomorrow or next Thursday which leaves everyone unhappy:
- Option 1: keep focal-subject as an extension with Reference(Any) and add a bunch text saying basicaly not use this if there is a perfectly good resource that does the job. ( maybe provide an example or two) and the caveat that in the future will look at possibility of a new resource to handle these types observation that are really truly assessments ( OpenEHR Evaluation archetype or a slimmed down ClnicalAssessment or overloaded MeasureReport)
- Option 2: promote focal-subject inline with Reference(Any) as a DSTU element and add a bunch text saying basically not use this if there is a perfectly good resource that does the job. ( maybe provide an example or two) and the caveat that in the future will look at possibility of a new resource to handle these types of assessments ( OpenEHR Evaluation archetype or a slimmed down ClnicalAssessment)
Community preference is for Option 2
EH/BM for option 2 as written: 5-0-7
Group I: Critical and breaking change to
Observation.dataAbsentReason (rob is leading this since a vocab issue)
- Since is a required binding in Observation is breaking change.
- recommendation is for OO to vote to make changes to codesystem and valueset as proposed. (preapplied) pending community consultation.
EH/HB: MOve as persuasive as dispositioned: 10-0-2
# ready for votes:
- 15605 reopen GF#14145 and redisposition as proposed
- Discussed - reopened GF#14145 and made duplicate to #15605
- reviewing the binding and datatype. discussed use cases will pick up on Monday.
Stopped here will pick up on Thursday
- 15522 Allow DiagnosticReport.result to be RiskAssessment too
- 15602 Remove DICOM mappings for Device and Substance
- review WK patterns ( quickly )
- Note all this has been preapplied for review in current build
- 13965 Multiple UDIs for Complex Devices
- referred to UDI call for disposition
- 15596 Request cardinality of Device.type be changed from 0..1 to 0..*
- requesting more detail on use case from submitter
clarification which needs to be deferred to next cycle:
note that anything with a negative ballot will be deferred as a not persuasive and tagged as a deferral to be reopenned in future ballot.
Back to OO_on_FHIR