1c. Is Your Project an Investigative Project (aka PSS-Lite)?
1d. Is your Project Artifact being Reaffirmed or proceeding to Normative directly after being either Informative or STU?
1e. Today's Date
1f. Name of standard being reaffirmed
1g. Project Artifact Information
1h. ISO/IEC Standard to Adopt
1i. Does the standard include excerpted text from one or more ISO, IEC or ISO/IEC standards, but is not an identical or modified adoption?
1j. Unit of Measure
2a. Primary/Sponsor WG
2b. Co-Sponsor WG
Clinical Decision Support
2c. Co-Sponsor Level of Involvement
Request formal content review prior to ballotRequest periodic project updates; specify period in text box below (e.g. 'Monthly', 'At WGMs', etc.)Other Involvement. Specify details in text box below
2c. Co-Sponsor Involvement
Wants active involvement, at least for aspects relevant to CDS concerns.
2b. Co-Sponsor WG 2
Clinical Quality Information
2c. Co-Sponsor Level of Involvement
Request periodic project updates; specify period in text box below (e.g. 'Monthly', 'At WGMs', etc.)
2b. Co-Sponsor WG 3
Service Oriented Architecture
2d. Project Facilitator
2e. Other Interested Parties (and roles)
2f. Modeling Facilitator
2g. Publishing Facilitator
2h. Vocabulary Facilitator
2i. Domain Expert Representative
Preston Lee, Bryn Rhodes
2j. Business Requirements Analyst
2k. Conformance Facilitator
2l. Other Facilitators
Logica Health, AHRQ
3a. Project Scope
The project goal is to develop a metadata standard that can address how to exchange any standards-based app or clinical content package by any organization (e.g., IHE, HL7, Logica, etc.). Standard metadata modeling is significant to clinical decision support, clinical quality measures, clinical smart apps to manage information for orders, laboratory studies, imaging studies, social determinants of health, patient empowerment calculations, clinical observations, military history, clinical exposures to determine patient risk for disease or injury, insurance benefits, clinical trial candidates, etc. Possible metadata concepts include items such as author / steward of the content, date(s) applicable, inclusion criteria, exclusion criteria, references, supporting evidence, strength of evidence and recommendation, expected users, etc, with actual concepts to be developed as part of the project.
As metadata elements need to address and accommodate resources owned and managed across HL7's product families, i.e. FHIR, CDA, V2, as well as resources that are found outside of the HL7 (i.e. BPM+), the project should be managed in Cross-Group Projects rather than a single area/domain. There is some existing work in CDS and CQI that will represent a good start and therefore, those WGs have signed on as co-sponsors, but to scope is to generalize those metadata for all concerns.
The Logica/HL7 Health Services Marketplace Release 2 (the "Specification" under SOA) provides a vendor-agnostic API for publication, curation, discovery, and distribution of interoperable service implementations. It is design to be agnostic to programming language, development framework, database, and I/O technologies, as well as account for client-side applications that require on-site deployment, such as SMART-on-FHIR.
This implementation guide defines the product metadata for products implementing several prominent or emerging HIT standards. That is, marketplace implementors intending to support curation and exchange of standardized product types should follow the guidance provided here to optimally support exchange of of product listings across implementations. Once implemented, marketplace operators should be able to:
* Accept manual and automated product build submissions from developers compliant with the standards supported under this IG.
* Post-product submission, provide:
** Automated "smoke test"-level regression testing against standard-specific compliance validations.
** Manual review by non-technical SMEs.
* Allow users to search for relevant products based on standard- and artifact-specific metadata, such as via free text search.
3b. Project Need
The Marketplace API STU does not define "product metadata" structures for asset submissions, as it is assumed the implementor will select schemas specific to and specialized for each supported standard relevant to the purpose of the implementation and content types.
3c. Security Risk
3d. External Drivers
3e. Objectives/Deliverables and Target Dates
2020 May Connectathon
2020 September ballot cycle; will attempt to keep dates aligned with external stakeholder organizations and events such as AHRQ roadmap, HIMSS, MCBK etc.
3f. Common Names / Keywords / Aliases:
Marketplace Product Packaging and Metadata
3h. Project Dependencies
HSP Marketplace 2 STU1 (under SOA WG)
Collaboration with external communities concerns with computable HIT metadata structures.