FHIR Consent July 20, 2016

HL7 CBCC FHIR Consent Working Meeting

Back to FHIR Consent Directive Project Main Page

Attendees

	Member Name		x	Member Name		x	Member Name		x	Member Name
x	Johnathan Coleman CBCC Co-Chair		x	Kathleen Connor FM Co-Chair		x	John MoehrkeSecurity Co-Chair		x	[mailto: Grahame Grieve] FHIR
	Alexander Mense Security Co-Chair		.	Jim Kretz		x	Tarik Idris		x	Ken Salyards
x	Suzanne Gonzales-Webb CBCC Co-Chair		.	Diana Proud-Madruga		x	[mailto: Oliver Lawless]			[mailto: Patrick Loyd]
x	M'Lynda Owens		x	David Staggs		x	Glen Marshall		x	Ken Sinn (Canada)
x	Rob Horn			Beth Pumo			William Kinsley		.	[mailto: Wayne Kubick]
x	Serafina Versaggi		.	[mailto: David Pyke]		x	Mike Davis		x	Mohammad Jafari (VA/ESC)
	Igor Sirkovich			Adrian Gropper		.	[mailto: Andrew Rampolla (SSA)]			[mailto: Eve Mahler]
	[mailto: Joe Lamy], Aegis		x	[mailto: Ioana		x	[mailto: Tank Idris

Johnathan, Kathleen, Suzanne Dave Pyke, Mike Davis, Ed Conley, Glen, Grahame, Ioana Singurean, Ken Sinn, Mohammad , Oliver, Patrick

Back to FHIR Consent Directive Project Main Page

Agenda

1. FHIR Consent changes made by Grahame - update
2. Discussions from e-mail/blog
   • (Glen) Consent for an Action (request 7/13)
3. *preference over e-mail discussion or blog?

Meeting minutes

e-mail string notes: Instead of using patient, client, (additional synonyms) etc... The use of 'SUBJECT OF CARE' has been introduced by Heather Grain in following the ISO agreement. Per Ken Salyards - we can add a footnote that lists all the synonyms

MOTION: table Abstention: none; against: none; approve: 13

Organization needs to resolve (if multiple policies) you can do so with an extension

• If you are a veteran in Maryland you are subject to two policies
  • Maryland state
  • VA

It’s not just title 38, it’s also Maryland’s own policy on mental health, the consent would be based on two polices and not just one. If you allow the policy to repeat, this is both 42CFR and Maryland’s... If it’s a matter of blending...let's make it optional (TO BE RESOLVED IN BALLOT)

‘’’Profiling’’’

• The source
  • The source of a consent (signed form, PDF) - could not find an example for XACML source

Do we want to support? That we do not want to allow computable consents...?

• Per Grahame; there is an extensions for consent rules: hl7-fhir.github.io/extension-consent-rules.html
  • You can argue in ballot that the extension can be what you’d like it to change to
  • Currently you can profile your extension in the resource

Why do we pick some elements to be extensions and others not

• Background context;
• (I) we want to be backwards computable with IBBC
• it is compatible with the way we do CDA

The resources are frozen (QA freeze for stability) right now, but the comments are most welcome for ballot reconciliation. Week of QA Week of Week ballot opens, accepting ballot comments ( Encourage implementers for problems, connect-ta-thon

Committee gForge used for ballot reconciliation

Other topics?