July 31, 2018 CBCP Conference Call

Attendees

	Member Name		x	Member Name		x	Member Name		x	Member Name
x	Johnathan ColemanCBCP Co-Chair		x	Suzanne Gonzales-Webb CBCP Co-Chair		x	Jim Kretz CBCP Co-Chair		x	David Pyke CBCP Co-Chair
x	Kathleen Connor Security Co-Chair		x	Mike Davis		x	John Moehrke Security Co-Chair		x	Diana Proud-Madruga
x	Chris Shawn		.	Neelima Chennamaraja		.	Joe Lamy		.	Greg Linden
x	Irina Connelly		.	Saurav Chowdhury		x	Dave Silver		x	Francisco Jauregui
.	Mark Meadows		.	Amber Patel		x	Becky Angeles		.	Jennifer Brush
.	Mohammad Jafari		.	Ali Khan		x	Ken Salyards		.	Michael Gu
x	David Staggs		.	Bonnie Young		x	Ioana Singureanu		.	Beth Pumo
.	Lawless		.	Ken Lord		.	[mailto:]		x	[mailto:]

Back to CBCP Main Page

Agenda

1. Roll Call, Agenda Review
2. Meeting Minutes approval: none to approve at this time
3. eLTSS Update - Irina / Becky
   • eLTSS gForge folder: https://gforge.hl7.org/gf/project/cbcc/docman/eLTSS%20-%20%20ONC%20Electronic%20Long-Term%20Services%20and%20Supports
4. PSS - CBCP Approval (Ken Lord)
5. Privacy - Is privacy Obsolete update - Mike Davis
6. FHIR Consent
   • Consent Vote -
   • FHIR CPs for review
   • FHIR Consent CPs are located: link to ALL Consent Change requests

Meeting Minutes DRAFT

Chair - Dave Pyke

eltss Last action - draft copy sent to CBPCP listserve

• please review and provide comment
• changes are being made for flow (almost at final version)
• Deadline: August 19 - for ballot content
• please send information to Becky and/or Irina
• Suzanne to follow up to Anne Wizauer regarding TSC / approval of PSS

PSS - To be a co-sponsor for SOA-

• review of PSS
  • extending previous project (2016) across different domains
  • we have co-sponsors (SOA CIMI) when we went ot steerng committee, tey asked we include a clinical WG
• using this approach for interoperation in our organizations (long standing work); work done w SAMHSA
  • also working w Suzanne and Kathleen - came forward w/storyboard (specific) in moving this forward
  • KenL would like steering comimtte approval / resources committed
  • apologies for spelling errors onshown PSS

• will work done primariy in another WG or in CBCP - how will updates be given (question from JColemna)
  • There is a use case doc that is in process of finalizing/refiing to make sure work is being compled (Suzanne, Kathleen KenL, Sean Muir)
  • subworkgroup will bring work to CBCP WG for recommendations/ feedback (others welcome) - add to CBCP agenda as approporiate, weekly if necessary
  • Ioana suggested CBCP invoived, we al ready have a publishec ross-paradigm doc. This project will elaborate the methodoloty of the cross paradigm ; this will be a generic methodology,

• Johnathn supports mission to support CBCP to be a co-sponsor this PSS/Project HL7 SOA Cross-Paradign Interoperability Project
• Motion: Ken Lord / Johnathan Coleman

No further discussion Vote: Abstentions: Joe Lamey (1) Opposed: none Apporval, motion passes:

Is Privacy Obsolete

• Intenrationall we review the laws, etc progress is being made in privacy but THIS WEEK its all going to hell ina handbasket
  • artificial intelligent has huge data privacy issues, information gleaned from AI; just about anything they need to know about you including correlating indivual info
  • we dont' know what we don't know...
• we are in more isolated/segement into populations for things that we know.
• positive - Facebook stock plummeted because they are making choice to their information aggregation; awareness of watch lists
  • face book stock plummeted
  • HIPAA certified amazon serveices and what it means for a small company - some company makes chose to publish PII without a password -
    • and this positive...?

• • they suck the soul of information, bludners, optimisc that bludnder another segment of the population wakes up; when company gets fined or sued out of existence... its a very slick way of reading and giving us what we want--this is where we are actually alerted, more awareness for the educated populous...

• pendulum swings back and forth

• • taking facebook as an example - daily active users in EU dropped, in US stayed flat (johnanth Coleman)

• (mikeD) we cannot underestimate the IOT of big data combined together..we have no significate weapons to guard in any way we are attacked---i.e. whack-a-mole; they don't need to know you personally...

• • racially, … its still harassment you are known by your choices

• • wee are the product; they are delivering us to their customers; its really education, did not know the drop was only in EU.. in US I expect they will also wake up; customers will sell you products..whatever the business model they're in--some entity to manimpute the behavior. advertising on TV is on, because it works to change peoples behavior

FHIR Consent

• CP - coming in late background
  • several weeks ago at the request of Kathleen - DAvid P went to FMG

on contract vs consent ; consent interoperability (see statement)

• • ioana - we don't have guidance on using consent w provenance (that's what I'm hearing...

Statement: 

1. 2 - this would be a Mreconds management question - I forman consent are contracts - in VA health Ioana has not heard that (and is questioning that statement)

Johnantn - questioning 3rd bullet - particialy endpoint; if the information is in the contract then the contract is WHERE we should find the information - wherin the consent is …

informaitn on consent including granting an denying of information for specific purpose is computable via the consent resounce. the background giving to DP the contract resoucne was too complete to feel comfortable with.. thereform theinformation would be capsutured and brought intot he consent resource and thenthe cosnnet resource would be pont of interoperability

kathleen there eis a governance issue - there is a … where a resoucne is using... o affect resource in antoer WG, this includes x paradime, contract would be the wrapper for any consent that doesn't have a patient for proposed use of MOU, this need s to have we should eedfer thte discussion for the propoer approach

mike would liket o suggest clarification of bullets being shown, does not have problem with bullet 1, secondin bullet would be understandable - and would consider the consent to b e useful by provider needs to be signed by the … and that is a contract. if I give you this consent to sign and you sign it... that's a contract. I do feel it is a contract. you can use the constract in addition to consent resource

scanned website …

3rd bulled does say... his should be for special purpose resouces and not …

johnanthn - its specific to (sounds like) consnent to xx? other projects are using fhir dstus 2 that are using contract... still object to last bulled, it might be the prorinciple resoucne,but may not be the principale for the projects already aout there... we need to hear from the implementers

per dave pyke and we hae.. the implementers around the world there are multiple beyond priacy, general privacy , treatment...

johnstnac e- we should hear from people using contract and should factor in those who chose to not use .. and find out why. supporter of the consent resource, bu do not believe that ther eis a one size unilaterial way to do this. that's why this

(see recording) dave to addres - this is the first stage the result to be passed on the FMG for reivew and TSC fo rreview and approporiate

kath - similar actions can occur and put forward … governance across,, we need process first before moving forward, who might in turn do the same proposal on cosnet., we need th eprocess first

kenSalyard - has question is contract using the STU3 consent? kath - it can reference it -

issue givien is the consent based on results of motion -

• is it appropoate to move forward without a process in place (jumping the gun) - do we need a governance process first?

• • can we put that notion on here to the three bullets - in th eproces of deliveloping we will approach the tSC for propeor governance - create a governmenace process for conflicting motions

• first bullet

original motion - is still on the screen and discussion is not complete and we should defer

• what is the impact of the motion if it passes

• • ther esi significant consuision I the market - unhappiness in the community ; this is a clarifying motion so that this moves forward in the current/current build an dbe used as a reference point and beyond

• • as written - Johnathan cannot
  • Mike agrees with JOhnanthn that further discussion is needed and defer the vote; further wordsmithing

is needed.

Consent motion is tabled until next week.

separate motion needed for governance process concerns