Difference between revisions of "CQI PSS - Gaps in Care"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
Link to PSS: [https://gforge.hl7.org/gf/project/desd/scmsvn/?action=browse&path=%2Ftrunk%2FDocuments%2FProjectScopeStatements%2F2018%2FHL7_Project_Scope_Statement_Gaps_In_Care_V4.docx&sortby=date&view=log CQI PSS] | Link to PSS: [https://gforge.hl7.org/gf/project/desd/scmsvn/?action=browse&path=%2Ftrunk%2FDocuments%2FProjectScopeStatements%2F2018%2FHL7_Project_Scope_Statement_Gaps_In_Care_V4.docx&sortby=date&view=log CQI PSS] | ||
| + | |||
| + | Link to UPDATED PSS: [https://gforge.hl7.org/gf/project/desd/scmsvn/?action=browse&path=%2Ftrunk%2FDocuments%2FProjectScopeStatements%2F2018%2FHL7_Project_Scope_Statement_Gaps_In_Care_V5%2520%25282018-07-09%2529.docx&sortby=date&view=log LINK TO UPDATED PSS] | ||
PBS Metrics: Green | PBS Metrics: Green | ||
Latest revision as of 17:59, 9 July 2018
Return to Domain Experts Electronic Voting Summaries
Please vote on the PSS for the CQI WG.
Enter your name and WG along with your vote. 1 vote per WG. Poll open until July 2, 2018.
Link to PSS: CQI PSS
Link to UPDATED PSS: LINK TO UPDATED PSS
PBS Metrics: Green
Link to Doodle Poll: Doodle Poll
- Summary -
- Number of participants: 8
- Most popular option: Affirmative
- Votes in favor: 8
- Comments: 0
- Non-participating work groups counted as abstaining solely for the purpose of counting quorum
Vote and Comments
| ' | Affirmative | Negative (with comments) | Abstain |
| Melva Peters (Pharmacy) | x | ||
| John Walsh (Anesth) | x | ||
| Kevin Power (Clinical Genomics) | x | ||
| Jim McClay (EC) | x | ||
| Stephen Chu (PC) | x | ||
| Craig Newman (PH) | x | ||
| John Garguilo (HCD) | x | ||
| Floyd Eisenberg (CQI) | x | ||
| Count | 8 | 0 | 0 |
| Comment (Stephen Chu - PC) - PCWG comments: (1) "A gap in care report is a patient or list level report containing data identifying individual patient(s), the quality measure(s) being evaluated ..." It is useful to provide a brief description of what "list level" reporting is, and examples will be helpful (2) the timeline is very aggressive. There is insufficient information in the PSS about preliminary works that may have been done to facilitate this aggressive timeline - first STU ballot in Sept 2018 |
