This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
Difference between revisions of "Care Provision D-MIM"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
# Identify the constraints needed to have the clinical statement in the D-MIM (see current documentation where the differences in 2007 where explained, are these still applicable?) | # Identify the constraints needed to have the clinical statement in the D-MIM (see current documentation where the differences in 2007 where explained, are these still applicable?) | ||
# Concern class update (as this has been a 2 year discussion where it was and has been included end 2009, and now all our models, documentation and XML needs to be updated with that). | # Concern class update (as this has been a 2 year discussion where it was and has been included end 2009, and now all our models, documentation and XML needs to be updated with that). | ||
| − | # Identify which CMETs are used and required from other domains | + | # Identify which CMETs are used and required from other domains. |
| + | # Identify and explain how to work with Coded Ordinal (CO) numeric value and code in R1. | ||
# Identify which CMETs are internal to Care Provision and need to go into the CMET library | # Identify which CMETs are internal to Care Provision and need to go into the CMET library | ||
| + | # Identify issues from publishing and how to handle these in the new version. | ||
# Add the reason for Care Provision to CP Act class with 0..* cardinality (as in Prica GGZ model the Netherlands), decided somewhere in 2007 / 2008, if questioned we might need to revote on that. | # Add the reason for Care Provision to CP Act class with 0..* cardinality (as in Prica GGZ model the Netherlands), decided somewhere in 2007 / 2008, if questioned we might need to revote on that. | ||
# Work on the identified (additional to 1-5 above) and approved change requests that are in the evaluation report by Nictiz Oct. 2010. (Voted in Oct 2010, see PC minutes of that WGM). | # Work on the identified (additional to 1-5 above) and approved change requests that are in the evaluation report by Nictiz Oct. 2010. (Voted in Oct 2010, see PC minutes of that WGM). | ||
# Discuss the additional use cases from Nictiz (sent March 15 by Gerda Meyboom from Nictiz), and decide what to do with this. | # Discuss the additional use cases from Nictiz (sent March 15 by Gerda Meyboom from Nictiz), and decide what to do with this. | ||
# Discuss and vote on additional suggestions brought to the table during the course of action in next WGMs. | # Discuss and vote on additional suggestions brought to the table during the course of action in next WGMs. | ||
Revision as of 11:39, 8 April 2011
This is the Care Provision project 2011.
Return to: Patient Care
Introduction
This page will be updated next weeks up to the May WGM 2011 with the plan of work to move Care Provision D-MIM to normative ballot in the next cycle, or cycle thereafter.
To do includes the following:
In the Oct. meeting PC decided to move the Care Provision D-MIM and Care Statement R-MIM to normative, based on the existing materials (e.g. R1 datatypes). So it will be updating in the existing specifications.
Once this is done, we will be moving to another specification based on the new specifications, e.g. R2 datatypes.
- Include the current clinical statement into the Care Provision D-MIM and adjust to become the updated Care Statement.
- Identify the constraints needed to have the clinical statement in the D-MIM (see current documentation where the differences in 2007 where explained, are these still applicable?)
- Concern class update (as this has been a 2 year discussion where it was and has been included end 2009, and now all our models, documentation and XML needs to be updated with that).
- Identify which CMETs are used and required from other domains.
- Identify and explain how to work with Coded Ordinal (CO) numeric value and code in R1.
- Identify which CMETs are internal to Care Provision and need to go into the CMET library
- Identify issues from publishing and how to handle these in the new version.
- Add the reason for Care Provision to CP Act class with 0..* cardinality (as in Prica GGZ model the Netherlands), decided somewhere in 2007 / 2008, if questioned we might need to revote on that.
- Work on the identified (additional to 1-5 above) and approved change requests that are in the evaluation report by Nictiz Oct. 2010. (Voted in Oct 2010, see PC minutes of that WGM).
- Discuss the additional use cases from Nictiz (sent March 15 by Gerda Meyboom from Nictiz), and decide what to do with this.
- Discuss and vote on additional suggestions brought to the table during the course of action in next WGMs.
