This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
Difference between revisions of "CDA R3 Right Hand Side of Model Analysis"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
* CDA documents must be human readable using widely-available and commonly-deployed XML-aware browsers and print drivers and a generic CDA style sheet written in a standard style sheet language. | * CDA documents must be human readable using widely-available and commonly-deployed XML-aware browsers and print drivers and a generic CDA style sheet written in a standard style sheet language. | ||
* Use open standards. | * Use open standards. | ||
− | |||
=CDA R3 requirements for right side of model= | =CDA R3 requirements for right side of model= |
Revision as of 21:36, 3 November 2009
SDWG page.
CDA R2 Design Principles
The goals of the CDA are:
- Give priority to delivery of patient care.
- Allow cost effective implementation across as wide a spectrum of systems as possible.
- Support exchange of human-readable documents between users, including those with different levels of technical sophistication.
- Promote longevity of all information encoded according to this architecture.
- Enable a wide range of post-exchange processing applications.
- Be compatible with a wide range of document creation applications.
- Promote exchange that is independent of the underlying transfer or storage mechanism.
- Prepare the design reasonably quickly.
- Enable policy-makers to control their own information requirements without extension to this specification.
A number of design principles follow from consideration of the above goals:
- This architecture must be compatible with XML and the HL7 RIM.
- This architecture must be compatible with representations of clinical information arising from other HL7 committees.
- Technical barriers to use of the architecture should be minimized.
- The architecture specifies the representation of instances required for exchange.
- The architecture should impose minimal constraints or requirements on document structure and content required for exchange.
- The architecture must be scalable to accommodate fine-grained markup such as highly structured text and coded data.
- Document specifications based on this architecture should accommodate such constraints and requirements as supplied by appropriate professional, commercial, and regulatory agencies.
- Document specifications for document creation and processing, if intended for exchange, should map to this exchange architecture.
- CDA documents must be human readable using widely-available and commonly-deployed XML-aware browsers and print drivers and a generic CDA style sheet written in a standard style sheet language.
- Use open standards.
CDA R3 requirements for right side of model
- Scope:
- Administrative and Financial Data needs to be addressed
- Expressivity (GG: how? what? so?)
- Consistency
- Support for domain models from other committees
- Internal consistency across domains
- Clear forwards migration path from CDA R2
- Formalization of best practices established over the past five years. (GG: aren't this a general CDA thing? what do they say about RHS?)
- Extension mechanisms
- Creator and Recipient Roles and Responsibilities
- Adopt existing extensions
- Implementation
- Enter into the architecture at varying degrees of sophistication (levels of CDA)
- Simplicity for implementers
- Limited/Fixed set of CDA -Schemas- Instance formats for implementers
- explicit schema validation support for RIM based extensions
- Support for schema tooling (e.g., binding, API creation, et cetera). (GG: support how?)
- Identical XML between HL7 V3 standards
- May want to consider a different ITS
Potential Solution Notes
- Bob’s Idea: Take the SDA Approach, build one model that has four choice boxes [one for each backbone class]...
- Ensure that use of components is invariant (e.g., C-METS) for some period of time based on review.