2013-07-31 TSC Task Force call

From HL7 TSC
Jump to navigation Jump to search
HL7 TSC Taskforce Meeting Minutes

Location: call 770-657-9270 using code 985371#

Date: 2013-07-31
Time: 5:00 PM U.S. Eastern
Chair: Austin Note taker(s): Lynn
Quorum = yes
TSC Members x Austin Kreisler x John Quinn, CTO x Calvin Beebe SSD SD
x Woody Beeler FTSD x Lorraine Constable ArB x Tony Julian FTSD
x Ken McCaslin adhoc x Ron Parker, ArB x Pat VanDyke SSD SD
x Lynn Laakso, scribe
CDS x Ken Kawamoto CDS x Howard Strasberg, CDS Guilherme Del Fiol, Bob Jenders
ITS x Paul Knapp
Members Members Observers/Guests
x Jacob Reider ONC x Victor Lee, Zynx Health x Aziz Boxwala, Meliorix/ ONC


TSC task force to deal with CDS issues


Convened at 5:05 PM with roll call

Austin described the issue with four projects coming to ballot this cycle and not approved, and also having issues raised by work groups.

  • Vote in SSD SD reviewed. They are convening a conference call Friday for review/approve the projects.
  • Project approval would normally occur earlier but now we need to iron this out. Templates and ITS WGs have issues.
  • DSTU ballot in May also for a DAM that includes implementation guidance.
  • Current realm is Universal; Austin would recommend US Realm and identify new projects to identify the UV realm work led by the appropriate work groups like ITS and Templates.
  • Lorraine suggests we a content group to work through the material and identify problematic areas like Datatypes and set up remediation plan. The plan could be developed in a week or so but the implementation of changes in the material might take longer. KenK notes that Paul Knapp joined them yesterday and already collectively identified some low-hanging fruit.
  • Austin notes timeframes are tight and there is already another out of cycle ballot identified for September.
  • Woody remarks that there are requests outstanding for f2f meetings in Cambridge that would be pre-empted by out of cycle ballot prior to that. Proceeding with current material, even as US Realm, does not align with HL7 modeling and current datatypes standard. Lorraine adds that we risk implementers adopting this would end up on another fork like the R2B datatypes.
  • KenK notes they are constraining the R2 datatypes. Lorraine notes we must ensure they are compatible, not just constrained. They have excluded null flavors so they have "denied problems" rather than a problem with a null flavor. Jacob is the primary sponsor of this work and Ken asks for his feedback. Jacob reiterates this is important to ONC and needed to use decision support for vMR on a subset of clinical concepts. They're willing to work with the other groups to ensure they are on the right path.
  • Woody observes regarding clinical data needed to support decision making would be incomplete without null data. He further notes that vMR is a broad term and might be better referenced as the CDS vMR model.
  • Austin recaps the ideas of limiting to US Realm in conjunction with review by a small group of content experts, but would likely not be ready to open in two weeks. Ken asks if it opens later would they be unable to conduct reconciliation at the WGM? It depends on the timing. Reconciliation can be conducted outside of the WGM as well prior to January.
  • KenK asks if they could add two weeks to the schedule; Jacob agrees that would work for ONC.
  • JohnQ reiterates the need for monitoring of these projects' progress. Austin notes there should be a project to manage the progress toward the UV realm standard.
  • Austin will review the approach on Friday's SSD SD call and Monday's TSC call
  • VMR DAM, R1 published. R2 balloted in May and they are preparing to submit for publication. Should that also be US Realm? The R3 wants to ballot and R2 is still in process of publication, is that permitted? R2 reconciliation must be complete before balloting release 3, not publication.
  • VMR XML IG change to US Realm, start work on R2, may not want to publish. If you introduce it to the market some early adopters will grab it - caveat on the front of the document is not enough. Then changes in the next release will be very problematic.
  • vMR templates IG change to US Realm out of cycle, make Templates a co-sponsor and give them responsibility for reviewing it.
  • KNART balloted January, waiting on publication. It references vMR artifacts, so release 1 should publish US Realm with caveat?
  • JohnQ notes the project management and communication will be critical.
  • DSS R2 making edits for REST for the SOAP interface. This can ballot in the regular cycle. DSS IG can be made US Realm, for using DSS along with vMR and ballot off-cycle as it references these other artifacts on the OOC ballot.
  • Austin will collect the names for the review group and try to convene them next week.

Adjourned 5:58 PM

Next Steps

Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)

Ken Kawamoto's summary

  • Universal Realm
  • Release 2 publish – caveat at front, BOLD
  • Release 3 ballot (off-cycle)

  • US Realm
  • Release 1 publish – caveat at front, BOLD; extra careful not to overlook resolution of existing negatives
  • Release 2 ballot (off-cycle)

vMR Templates IG
  • US Realm
  • Request templates to be a co-sponsor
  • Off-cycle

CDS Knowledge Artifact IG
  • US Realm
  • Release 1 publish – caveat
  • Release 2 ballot (off-cycle)

  • Universal Realm
  • Release 2 ballot

  • US Realm
  • Ballot (off-cycle)

Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items

© 2013 Health Level Seven® International