July 31, 2018 CBCP Conference Call
Contents
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 | x | Ken Lord | . | [mailto:] | x | [mailto:] |
Agenda
- Roll Call, Agenda Review
- Meeting Minutes approval: none to approve at this time
- eLTSS Update - Irina / Becky
- PSS - CBCP Approval (Ken Lord)
- Privacy - Is Privacy Obsolete update - Mike Davis
- 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 to steering committee, they 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 committee approval / resources committed
- apologies for spelling errors shown PSS
- will work be done primarily in another WG or in CBCP - how will updates be given (question from JColeman)
- There is a use case doc that is in process of finalizing/refining to make sure work is being completed (Suzanne, Kathleen KenL, Sean Muir)
- sub workgroup will bring work to CBCP WG for recommendations/ feedback (others welcome) - add to CBCP agenda as appropriate, weekly if necessary
- Ioana suggested CBCP involvement, we already have a published cross-paradigm doc. This project will elaborate the methodology of the cross paradigm ; this will be a generic methodology,
- Johnathan supports mission to support CBCP to be a co-sponsor this PSS/Project HL7 SOA Cross-Paradigm Interoperability Project
- Motion: Ken Lord / Johnathan Coleman
No further discussion Vote: Abstentions: Joe Lamy (1) Opposed: none Approval, motion passes:
Is Privacy Obsolete
- International we review the laws, etc. progress is being made in privacy but THIS WEEK it’s all going to hell in a handbasket
- artificial intelligent has huge data privacy issues, information gleaned from AI; just about anything they need to know about you including correlating individual info
- we don’t' know what we don't know...
- we are in more isolated/segment 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 services 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, blunders, optimism that blunder another segment of the population wakes up; when company gets fined or sued out of existence... it’s 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 (Johnathan 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
- we 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 manipulate the behavior. advertising on TV is on, because it works to change people’s 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:
- 2 - this would be a Medical records management question – Informational (?) consent are contracts - in VA health Ioana has not heard that (and is questioning that statement)
Johnathan - questioning 3rd bullet – particularly the endpoint; if the information is in the contract then the contract is WHERE we should find the information - where in the consent is …
information on consent including granting and denying of information for specific purpose is computable via the consent resource. the background giving to DP the contract resource was too complete to feel comfortable with... therefor the information would be captured and brought into the consent resource and then the consent resource would be point of interoperability
Kathleen there is a governance issue - there is a … where a resource is using... o affect resource in another WG, this includes cross- paradigm,
contract would be the wrapper for any consent that doesn't have a patient for proposed use of MOU, this needs to have
we should defer the discussion for the proper approach
mike would like to suggest clarification of bullets being shown, does not have problem with bullet 1, second bullet would be understandable - and would consider the consent to be 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 contract in addition to consent resource
scanned website …
3rd bullet does say... his should be for special purpose resources and not …
Johnathan - its specific to (sounds like) consent to xx? other projects are using FHIR DSTU 2 that are using contract... still object to last bulled, it might be the principle resource, but may not be the principal for the projects already out there... we need to hear from the implementers
per Dave Pyke and we have... the implementers around the world there are multiple beyond privacy, general privacy , treatment...
Johnathan- 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, but do not believe that there is a one size unilateral way to do this. that's why this
(see recording) Dave to address - this is the first stage the result to be passed on the FMG for reivew and TSC for review and appropriate
Kathleen - 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 consent., we need the process first
Ken Salyards - has question is contract using the STU3 consent? Kathleen - it can reference it -
issue given is the consent
based on results of motion -
- is it appropriate 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 the process of developing we will approach the TSC for proper governance - create a governance 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
- there is significant confusion in the market - unhappiness in the community ; this is a clarifying motion so that this moves forward in the current/current build and be used as a reference point and beyond
- as written - Johnathan cannot
- Mike agrees with Johnathan that further discussion is needed and defer the vote; further wordsmithing
is needed.
Consent motion is tabled until next week.
