For the Pharmacy IG Templates, they have created an IG that is targeted to creators of new IGs vs. implementers. As such, the question of tooling has come up from a quality perspective and the importance of using a common tool vs. using more than one approved tool as has been done in the case of the Pharmacy IG Templates.
On a side note, they have full C-CDA sample messages for their scope. It was recommended that they get those included in the Examples that are currently driven by the Examples Task Force. Since they already have content, it would primarily be a review of their content. This raises a question of whether this is good practice? Should it be encouraged?
The team that created the Orthodontist Attachment C-CDA IG is questioning the US Realm Header concerns as part of the IG. They have included it and believe it is important for successful implementation and the SDWG seems to concur. What are the guidelines around including it vs. referring back to the C-CDAr2.1?
Another question from the Ortho Attachment group is around the examples. They are creating samples that they are trying to make contextually relevant. When they bring in the US Realm header, they get many pieces that are not relevant. They are questioning if those must stay in the document or if they can remove the snippet examples that are not contextually relevant to avoid confusion?