This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here

Difference between revisions of "CDS on FHIR"

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 25: Line 25:
 
Contraindication
 
Contraindication
  
Should the name be something that allows non-true contraindications (e.g., interaction warnings)?  E.g., Warning, or ContraindicationOrWarning.  The severity attribute may be able to deal with this (e.g., absolute vs. relative contraindication).
+
Should the name be something that allows non-true contraindications (e.g., interaction warnings)?  E.g., Warning, or ContraindicationOrWarning.  The severity attribute may be able to deal with this (e.g., absolute vs. relative contraindication).  Per Lloyd, Or typical not in name.  Warning in OperationOutcome so ambiguous.
  
What is the use case for this Resource?  It seems like it would be for an evaluation result by a medication CDS system.
+
What is the use case for this Resource?  It seems like the primary one would be for an evaluation result by a medication CDS system (e.g., drug-drug, duplicate Rx, etc.).  Occasionally might be an in-person documentation (e.g., through medication review).  Other data points include evidence base, etc.  But this could potentially be handled by extensions, either vendor-specific or common.  May be worth getting vendors engaged.
  
 
The severity levels do not correspond to the richer levels provided by several commercial knowledge vendors.
 
The severity levels do not correspond to the richer levels provided by several commercial knowledge vendors.
  
May be the case that Communication should be the focus of the drug interaction warning, not Contraindication.
+
May be the case that Communication should be the focus of the drug interaction warning, not Contraindication.  Lloyd: this would be referenced by communication.

Revision as of 19:30, 18 June 2015

Return to Clinical Decision Support Work Group

Project Co-Sponsors:

Project Information

This project will investigate the use of FHIR in a Clinical Decision Support context with the goal of identifying best practices for the use of FHIR in support of the primary use cases of Clinical Decision Support, namely 1) Sharing Clinical Decision Support (CDS) knowledge artifacts, and 2) Obtaining Clinical Decision Support guidance as part of a clinical workflow.

Meeting Information

The CDS on FHIR project subteam meets weekly: Conference call coordinates

Status

The Project Scope Statement for this project has been approved by the primary and co-sponsoring work groups and submitted to HL7.

Project Documents

FHIR-Based CDS Proposed Approach Slides - File:FHIR-Based CDS.pptx


Potential Issues Identified for FHIR Resources to be Officially Balloted in the Future

Contraindication

Should the name be something that allows non-true contraindications (e.g., interaction warnings)? E.g., Warning, or ContraindicationOrWarning. The severity attribute may be able to deal with this (e.g., absolute vs. relative contraindication). Per Lloyd, Or typical not in name. Warning in OperationOutcome so ambiguous.

What is the use case for this Resource? It seems like the primary one would be for an evaluation result by a medication CDS system (e.g., drug-drug, duplicate Rx, etc.). Occasionally might be an in-person documentation (e.g., through medication review). Other data points include evidence base, etc. But this could potentially be handled by extensions, either vendor-specific or common. May be worth getting vendors engaged.

The severity levels do not correspond to the richer levels provided by several commercial knowledge vendors.

May be the case that Communication should be the focus of the drug interaction warning, not Contraindication. Lloyd: this would be referenced by communication.