There are a number of efforts related to quality and this page is an attempt to organize those various items into a single component so we can easily get to the various aspects of the quality work we are engaged in at any time.
We have a number of quality issues and efforts that we are engaged in as a product management group within HL7®. During the Working Group Meeting in Baltimore in 2018, there were numerous quality questions that were brought up in reconciliation meetings with different working groups including Structured Documents, Pharmacy, and others that were referred to the CDA Management Group for feedback. In addition, the chairs of the CDA Management Group have commented on recent ballots on items and marked them with concerns related to quality. CDA Management Group is in the process of updating the Quality Criteria and working on process to better track the reviews that they are doing.
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.
The Pharmacy IG Templates are also questioning the need for examples in their document since it is targeted to IG creators. Do they need full sample files? Can they just create snippets?
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?
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?