2010-03-08 TSC Call Minutes

From HL7 TSC
Jump to navigation Jump to search

TSC Minutes - see original at Meeting Minutes template

HL7 TSC Meeting Minutes

Location: call 770-657-9270 using code 124466#
GoToMeeting ID: 165-215-206

Date: 2010-03-08
Time: (11:00 am - 12:00 pm U.S. Eastern Time)
Facilitator Charlie McCay Note taker(s) Lynn Laakso
Attendee Name Affiliation Email Address
x Calvin Beebe HL7 SSD SD cbeebe@mayo.edu
x Woody Beeler HL7 FTSD woody@beelers.com
x Austin Kreisler HL7 DESD austin.j.kreisler@saic.com
x Lynn Laakso (scribe, non-voting) HL7 HQ lynn@hl7.org
regrets Ken McCaslin HL7 TSS SD Kenneth.H.McCaslin@QuestDiagnostics.com
x Charlie McCay (chair) HL7 TSC Chair charlie@ramseysystems.co.uk
regrets Charlie Mead HL7 ArB Charlie.mead@booz.com
x Ravi Natarajan HL7 Affiliate Ravi.Natarajan@nhs.net
Ron Parker HL7 ArB Alternate rparker@infoway-inforoute.ca
x John Quinn HL7 CTO jquinn@hl7.org
x Gregg Seppala HL7 SSD SD Alternate gregg.seppala@va.gov
regrets Helen Stevens HL7 TSS SD Alternate helen.stevens@shaw.ca
regrets Ed Tripp HL7 DESD Alternate Edward.tripp@estripp.com
x D. Mead Walker HL7 FTSD Alternate dmead@comcast.net
x Kensaku Kawamoto CDS Co-chair kawam001@mc.duke.edu
Quorum Requirements (Co-chair +5 with 2 SD Reps) Met: yes
Agenda Topics
  1. Introduction of visitors (including declaration of interests)
  2. Agenda review and approval –
  3. Motion to approve: Project Request for CDS of FTSD - updated scope statement for Virtual Medical Record (vMR) at TSC Tracker # 1474, and Project Insight ID # 184
  4. Approve Minutes from 2010-03-01_TSC_Call_Minutes
  5. Review action items –
    • Updated Three-year plan
    • ArB awareness of pending projects: All TSC members have been added to the Steering Division lists.
  6. CEO Report –
  7. CTO Report –
  8. ArB Report –
  9. Affiliates Report –
  10. Domain Experts –
  11. Foundation & Technology –
  12. Structure & Semantic Design –
  13. Technical & Support Services -
  14. WGM Planning
  15. Discussion Topics:
Supporting Documents
  1. Link to T3F recommendations as of June 2007.
Minutes/Conclusions Reached:
  1. Visitors: Ken K. joined as CDS co-chair on the vMR project.
  2. Agenda: move CDS item to start of agenda. Ravi asked about the SMART objectives going to the Roadmap committee as is unless other comments are brought forward today. Agenda accepted.
  3. Motion to approve: Project Request for CDS of FTSD - updated scope statement for Virtual Medical Record (vMR) at TSC Tracker # 1474, and Project Insight ID # 184
    • Discussion: Ken noted the project trying to identify inputs and outputs for CDS engines and build a framework to standardize the I/O. Four use cases initially defined by Robert Dunlop in 2008. Scope expanding on the data to be considered. DAM to be developed, then V2 IG and V3 models. Andrew McIntyre (AU) on GELLO has been identified, other domain experts are still being sought. CDS has no V3 MnM facilitator. Perhaps may develop committee-level expertise. Austin asks could it be made clear that V3 models will be enhanced from existing models or work with other groups to develop rather than initiating new development. Ken notes they’re open to working with whatever committee can offer assistance or allow such modeling to be hosted by another committee. Woody notes that clinical statement is under-represented in the scope. Ken says their committee has little V3 modeling expertise and are focusing on the DAM. Clinical statements model is an important starting point for them. Austin notes the DCM from Patient Care would have significant overlap. Woody notes the BRIDG model, while aimed at research community, is quite advanced and has identified a great deal of complexity going from a DAM to V3 models. The individual pieces of clinical assessment represented in the DCMs would be incorporated into a vMR. Ken said they sent a request to CDS implementers to see what data they commonly use for inferencing purposes. They will build a subset of data. Woody notes the title of Virtual Medical Record is farther reaching than management of I/O between clinical systems and CDS services. He cautions the TSC needs to manage the development of this in several places within HL7 never mind in CEN and Open EHR. Ken notes they are not trying to model something as granular as an Apgar score. It tries to work at the level of the problem list and the presence or absence of underlying observations. vMR is a domain-specific term in the CDS world; they could change the name. Ravi asks if they should indicate GELLO rules at the top of the product list; and have they reviewed the DCM efforts? Mead notes that the different groups are trying to take hold of different parts of the same elephant.
    • Motion amended: Mead moves to approve with amendments to change “A Virtual Medical Record (vMR) is a data model for representing clinical information inputs and outputs that can be exchanged between local clinical information systems and clinical decision support (CDS) engines such as CDS services.” To “A Virtual Medical Record (vMR) is a data model for representing clinical information inputs and outputs that can be exchanged between clinical decision support (CDS) engines such as CDS services and local clinical information systems, along with anticipated clarification on the intended use. Seconded by Austin.
    • Vote: Approved unanimously.
  4. Approve Minutes from 2010-03-01_TSC_Call_Minutes unanimously approved.
  5. Review action items –
    • Updated Three-year plan; TSC endorse it as working three-year plan with review in Rio. Approved by general consent.
    • Listserv updates noted.
  6. CEO Report – none
  7. CTO Report – John reports he sent one out before the call as board report; attached here; HITSP vocab task force representing SCO, Dolin representing HL7; also available from ONC web site. Also presentation from HIMSS.
  8. ArB Report – none
  9. Affiliates Report – nothing to report; HL7 UK conference occurred but he was not in attendance. Charlie notes he was there but no issues for TSC. Barcelona next week – John will be there due to ISO TAG meeting following.
  10. Domain Experts – nothing to report.
  11. FTSD
    • Motion to approve: Project Request for InM of FTSD - Batch Messaging at TSC Tracker # 1468, and Project Insight ID # 619.
      • Discussion: Original wrappers did not include batch, since wrappers being held back need to bring this out separately. Taking a draft specification along the normative track.
      • Vote: Approved unanimously.
    • Motion to approve: Project Request for ITS of FTSD - MicroITS and hData project at TSC Tracker # 1475.
      • Discussion: Looking for a compact message instance with easier to read structure. It was discussed at steering division that creating additional ITS would become too many ITSs. Does this relate to Mohawk? This is the umbrella project for that. Austin asks if GreenCDA is part of this? Mead thinks that it is a parallel effort. Calvin notes that Structured Docs is not ready to identify it as an ITS rather as a tooling for developers. Calvin notes the V3 XML is the gold standard, despite Keith Boone’s assertion that GreenCDA is a MicroITS. Calvin notes that the intent was to explore tooling to make CDA more palatable. Ravi notes the payload seems quite broad and will it use different vocabulary and datatypes? Woody asks what is hData and what do they mean by RESTful transport. Austin agrees that a better description is needed. John notes hData is a project by Mitre corporation but that is not a sufficient reference. Woody also seeks reassurance that it will not assert a new datatypes spec. Austin notes they have checked a public document, asking us to give the specification away for free. Is this an implication of the development of a new ITS? John thinks it’s reasonable to indicate they should do the research but then let’s have a conversation before developing. hData is about a transport protocol using URLs to retrieve data. They seek to draft a DSTU for the transport and a lightweight ITS. Mead will follow up with request for clarification of RESTful and hData and what they mean by ‘more business oriented’.
      • Disposition: Motion tabled.
  12. SSD SD
    • CDS business addressed earlier in the agenda.
    • InM updated Mission and Charter statement.
  13. T3SD - none
  14. WGM: Ask co chairs to poll their Work Groups to plan for quorum, checking project attendance at Rio. Ravi asks for a unified page where affiliates can see which WG are meeting. Agendas published early would help people plan attendance –
    • Action Item: check with HQ to see if they can be made available.
    • Visa application: Midwest - see http://www.brazilconsulatechicago.org
      • check your local consulate here: http://www.consulatebrazil.org/jurisd.htm
      • All lodging reservations will be made through Blumar Events. To reserve your room, HL7 attendees should log on to http://www.blumar.com.br/wgmhl7, then click “Hotel Reservation.” Next, click the circle under “Select Hotel” and continue.
      • Action Item: Ensure these are available on the WGM page.
      • Remote participation requests passed on by Austin, with willingness to pay remote access fees. Public Health folks generally can never obtain permission to travel internationally but would pay remote attendance fees. Place on agenda for next week.
  15. Discussion Topics:
  16. Adjourned 12:00 pm Eastern Standard.
Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)
  • Action Item: Lynn check with HQ to see if early agendas can be made available.
  • Action Item: Ensure the Brazil consulate links are available on the WGM page.
Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items
  1. May 2010 Ballot Approval List - review for next week's discussion; please have a look.
  2. Remote participation requests for those willing to pay remote attendance fees. Place on agenda for next week.

Future Agenda item list

Click for TSC Action Item List

Retrieved from "https://tscwiki.hl7.org/w/index.php?title=2010-03-08_TSC_Call_Minutes&oldid=6521"