Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Note:

The following Google Document will be used to track the notes during the meeting:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/17uizyhR2pjb0fotMjShbrRYIQTyK64DERk_u-jS9fuc/edit#



Table of Contents


Date: Monday Oct 1

Quarter: Q3

Create Decision from template

Co-chair: Gil

Goals

FHIR review

Prep for joint with FHIR

IG Ballot reconciliation

  • Block vote

---

FHIR review

SLIDES:

https://tinyurl.com/ybm7tcqx

DAM published with increased CG Use cases:

http://www.hl7.org/implement/standards/product_brief.cfm?product_id=479

Tutorial on Wednesday - app development using FHIR R3 (released Mar 2017)

Bob M: Can apply current/R4 guidance to these structures as well

  • only issue is they wouldn’t validate vs a structure definition

  • Observation, Patient and some other structures could be Normative along with the R4 ballot this Winter.

    • After normative, should alleviate backwards compatibility concerns, eg, Observations pointing to Resources, StructureDefinition, etc

  • Should think about adding search examples for our Profiles.

Connectathon Review

  • DiagnosticReports with attached observations, no working model currently, should be finishing and sharing shortly.

  • 6-8 participants

    • HLA - (conversion of HML to FHIR Bundle experiment, tried using Provenance along with Device).

      • Many used reference sequence but didn’t give start and end (which are req)

      • gForge tracker placed

    • Some Oncology use case projects worked on as well.

  • Filed a few trackers for some missing bindings, code systems listed in text but value sets haven’t been implemented yet.

  • Reference Servers couldn’t handle profile validation, Grahamme recently addressed and has re-deployed one.

  • Potential link to the Breast Cancer Implementation Guide in the works

---

Prep for joint with FHIR

  • Would a country-specific implementation guide require a separate PSS? What are the options there?

    • Problem Scope Statement describing the project

  • Implementation guide versus profile Guidance in Core

  • When to do a whole new country specific guide vs add in section in an existing universal guide (US, Germany)?- balloted by affiliates?  Profile off of other guides?

  • Panels including thousands of studied genes, would they each need a separate observation?

    • How best to search through Observation components?

---

Block

ID

Summary

Status

Ballot Resolution

Resolution

Submitter

16108

Genetics Panel: Suggest removing

Triaged

Considered for Future Use

Defer

Kevin Power

16266

Move arrCHG-ratio from Described Variant to Copy Number Change profile

Triaged

Persuasive

Persuasive: Move arrCHG-ratio component from Described Variant to Copy Number Change profile.

Bob Dolin

16269

FISH Panel should have 0..* FISH probes

Triaged

Persuasive with Mod

Persuasive with mod - We are removing fish panel profile altogether, see tracker 16869

Bob Dolin

16270

Add copy-number component (LOINC 82155-3) to Copy Number Change profile

Triaged

Persuasive

Persuasive: Add copy-number component (LOINC 82155-3) to Copy Number Change profile

Bob Dolin

16271

Add property 'name' to Device Component FISH Probe profile

Triaged

Persuasive

Persuasive: Add property 'name' to Device Component FISH Probe profile as a codeable concept

Bob Dolin

Vote:  Approve Block

Motion / 2nd:  Bob M / Patrick

Discussion

Abstain / Against / For: 0 / 0 / 10

Result: Block passes


Quarter: Q4

Create Decision from template

Co-chair: Gil

Goals

Joint with FHIR-I

Updates

Focus:

Publication of R4, a couple spots on normative content, will update co-chairs with specifics of timing.

Maturity level discussion: http://build.fhir.org/versions.html#maturity

  • Would a country-specific implementation guide require a separate PSS? What are the options there?

    • Problem Scope Statement describing the project

  • When to do a whole new country specific guide vs add in section in an existing universal guide (US, Germany)?- balloted by affiliates?  Profile off of other guides?
  • What are operations?
  • How best to search through Observation components?
  • Implementation guide versus Implementation Guidance in Core


Q: We aren’t thinking of using observation resources for entire genome?  

While it doesn’t break the specification, it brings issues of density and volume of data,

Want a structured output, what about pointers?

FHIR resource that pointed to that information

Variant stores with api’s

SNP chips will become bigger with time

1 observation each vs 1 observation with a bunch of components, vs some grouping (abnormal/unknown/wild type). Example: FHIR’s vital signs profile vs separate observations.

Reference to test should persist either way, just need to take care of implicit data (not reported does not imply no finding)

Use case - Oncology ~700 genes. Physicians don’t want VCF, etc., they want a diagnostic report

Hope to add guidance for when/how to switch from full gene data in Obs, Sequence etc, other wrappers. May require custom operations.

Use case - CDS hooks

Operations framework:

In addition to CRUD framework - defines API and business rules surrounding it.

eg Argonaut, book an appointment (some params, business logic happens, outputs made).

Argonaut - implementation guides and additional software.

Eg. how to create patient portal, scheduling appointment creation.

“Implementation Guide” vs “Guidance” document in core:

Workflow: set of specific problems to address, end to end. Will likely constrain core resources. Has own release schedule, can choose to point to a specific version of FHIR.

How much authority of HL7 is behind a published implementation guide?

Overlap of use cases in separate guides could lead to conflicting information, eg breast cancer inside of the rest of oncology. Philosophic concern to find commonalities.

Work both top-down (universally) and bottom-up (constraining to individual use cases)

It will be iterative.

Bob M will be working toward HLA-specific sections and build an additional (external to our guide).

Q: Coding System definition specification.

A: broadly we have a TM/IM split (terminology vs information).

Q: if you wanted to be universal, but a common approach is US-specific,

A: There are LOINC codes referenced in the international Vital Signs profile, it is not without contention. At the core spec you may recommend codes, but an IG may want to lock down a specific code system.

Q: We have a lot of required bindings that are LOINC codes. It’s free, nothing stopping anyone from other countries anywhere using it, which was our intention for the universal guide. What other options are there here?

A: you could make your own code system, but in general you want to be as specific as you can while bringing together the stakeholders. At the intermediate level you can leave the code system as open and then nail down separate code systems in separate implementation guides.

Let’s pull all the LOINC codes we reference currently to see the scope of the concern.

Options: make a choice of specific code system, don’t specify, or make our own.

---

IG Ballot reconciliation

  • Ballot Comment Discussion

Ballot Comments - (did not cover Monday)




Date: Tuesday Oct 2

Quarter: Q1

Create Decision from template

Goals

Review Agenda

Review of CG for newcomers

Bob Milius' slides

Note - discussion about V2 -> FHIR

PSS: https://confluence.hl7.org/display/HL7/2-To-FHIR

Review of Jan 2019 Ballot Schedule:

Ballot Comments

ID

Summary

Status

Ballot Resolution

Resolution

Submitter

16698

Remove or shrink text - 2018-May Genomics #6

Triaged



Clement McDonald

16740

Consider consolidating and using simple NCBI or GHR reference description - 2018-May Genomics #18

Triaged



Clement McDonald

16743

Redundant words, the reference is a sequence+P22 - 2018-May Genomics #19

Triaged



Clement McDonald

16748

Possible inaccuracy - 2018-May Genomics #20

Triaged



Clement McDonald

18987

Computable Genetic Finding gene studied id is missing a binding to HGNC

Triaged

Persuasive

Persuasive Change pre-applied



Tracker 18987: Computable Genetic Finding gene studied id is missing a binding to HGNC

Do we say Gene Symbol?  ID? Currently have indicated Symbol.

Example: <coding>

<system value=”https://www.genenames.org/”/>

<code value=”HGNC:4931”/>

<display value=”HLA-A”/>

</coding>

Should we be using “HLA-A” as code instead?

Change to Extensible / HGNC first, NCBI next.  Update wording to reflect alternatives.

Motion: Accept pre-applied change, plus Change to Extensible / HGNC first, NCBI next.  Update wording to reflect alternatives.

Move / 2nd: Kevin / Patrick

Discussion: None

Abstain / Nay / Approve: 1 / 0 / 13

Updated Background section:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vWY7fHbSl0ZxkTJAXZ8gz8nHUgYrHlKBCYy2bTaxiXs/edit#heading=h.8dkv8dsudm60

Clem agreed with Withdraw:

Have logged a new tracker for updates to the background document:

[#19214]

Did not discuss 16247


 


Quarter: Q2

Create Decision from template

Goals

IG Ballot reconciliation

Ballot Comments

IDSummaryStatusBallot ResolutionResolutionSubmitter
#19214Updates to CG IG -> Background documentTriaged

Kevin Power
16840More information needed for relatedArtifact - 2018-May Genomics #45Waiting for Input
Not Persuasive? Described options to Clem, waiting for his feedback.Clement McDonald


Discussion items

continued discussion of Genomics Primer in IG

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vWY7fHbSl0ZxkTJAXZ8gz8nHUgYrHlKBCYy2bTaxiXs


  • #19214
    • impacts are always tied to a one or more specific genetic findings
    • overall interpretations vs conclusion/conclusionCode
      • overall interpretation observation can be tied to specific observation, but a specific conclusionCode among a set of conclusionCodes in DG can't be associated with a specific observation.
    • Changes made to google doc during this Quarter will be added to tracker 
  • 16840
    • relatedArtifact (extension of DiagnosticReport) can be used to add citations and other artifacts
    • Observation used to have a valueAttachment which was removed for R4. OO will add it back as an extension in R4, and add it back to the resource in R5
    • DiagnosticReport also as media data element
    • Clem agrees to withdraw this tracker



Quarter: Q3

Create Decision from template

Presiding co-chair - Gil

Goals

IG Ballot reconciliation



ID

Summary

Status

Ballot Resolution

Resolution

Submitter

16247

Sequence quality needs more work

Waiting for Input

Bob D will withdraw- tbc

Waiting on feedback from Gil.

Bob Dolin

16904

genomics vs. genetics and expanding diagnostic - 2018-May Genomics #66

Waiting for Input

Motion/Second

Kevin/Bob M

Abstain/Nay/Yay

Clem/0/12

Persuasive with mod. Change name of Genetics Diagnostic Report to Genomics Report. Would welcome a separate tracker with 

Amnon Shabo

16908

The use of Observation - 2018-May Genomics #67

Waiting for Input

Kevin/Patrick

Discussion: 

Abstain/Nay/Yay

0/0/13

Persuasive with mod: Make the cardinality Observation.interpretation and Observation.component.interpretation 0..0

Amnon Shabo

16184

Genetic Impact - Need LOINC code for level of evidence

Waiting for Input

Discussion:

 

http://build.fhir.org/ig/HL7/genomics-reporting/obs-impact.html

 

Current LOINCs in the IG:

here

 

Proposal: request “Level of Evidence for Genomic Impact” code

from LOINC.

 

Kevin/Patrick

Patrick:

If LOINC is unable we can use an internal code.

Kevin will send the proposal to LOINC to the listserv before submission.

 

Abstain/Nay/Yay

0/0/13

Persuasive? This can be a LOINC code without an answer list.  For now, change the data type from CodeableConcept to String until the code systems can become more stable, unless the references below to CPIC, MVLD/AMP, and ClinVar below are enough to act as possible code systems??

Kevin Power

 

 




Quarter: Q4

Create Decision from template


Tuesday Q4

Co-chair: Gil Alterovitz

16923

genetic finding - 2018-May Genomics #73

Waiting for Input

Following-up on tracker re: recent relevant updates, will schedule on a future conference call

Detail requested from Amnon.

Amnon Shabo

16935

types of overall interpretation - 2018-May Genomics #77

Waiting for Input

Will be drafting a proposal to merge the two profiles (main separation is the required answer list)

Amnon would like to discuss in person

Amnon Shabo


16080

Allow for SNOMED terms for PGx Impacts

Triaged


Not persuasive

Kevin Power

16081

New PGx Impact: Transporter

Triaged

Arthur/Patrick

Discussion:

Will consider combining PGx profiles in the future but not a priority at this time.

 

Abstain/Nay/Yay:

0/0/13

Persuasive, add new profile mirroring obs-metabolism.

Kevin Power

16082

PGx Impact - Allele functional status

Triaged

James/Kevin

Discussion:

More general statement than other profiles, may be interesting for future use cases

 

Abs/Nay/Yay

0/0/13

Not persuasive, status = Defer

Kevin Power

16174

PGx Impact - Multiple Levels of Evidence

Triaged

Discussion:

Can already accept 2 codings in the same codeable concept

Kevin will withdraw

Kevin Power

16175

Genetic Impact - Add ACMG reference for level of evidence

Triaged

Discussion:

Interesting use case to be able to deliver, will need a proposal

Considered for future use

Kevin Power



Date: Wednesday Oct 3

Quarter: Q1

Create Decision from template

Cochair: Bob M

Goals

Ballot Reconciliation

Ballot Comments

ID

Summary

Status

Ballot Resolution

Resolution

Submitter

16175

Genetic Impact - Add ACMG reference for level of evidence

Triaged

Discussion:

Interesting use case to be able to deliver, will need a proposal

UPDATE: Patrick - can use multiple "Observation.components" with the same "code" - defines a single slice, but that is OK.

 

Motion:

Request a new LOINC code for ACMG Supporting evidence for variant pathogenicity (see codes in linked document)

Add as component to Inherited Disease Pathogenicity

Ensure this slice can be 0..*

Patrick / 2nd Dora

Discussion: none

Abstain / Nay / Yes

0 / 0 / 11

Considered for future use

UPDATE: Persuasive - Create a new component (ACMG Level of Evidence), indicating we can allow multiple components.

Perhaps vote?

Kevin Power

16177

Somatic Impact - Support MVLD levels of evidence

Triaged

Minimal Variant Level Data (MVLD) 

 

Related to:

16174

 

Already supports multiple components for level of evidence

 

Motion:

Provide example bindings to CPIC, MVLD in the sub-classes that would align to the right area.

Textual description at the base level of “all” the possibilities.

Patrick / 2nd Jamie

Discussion: None

Abstain / Ney / Yes

0 / 0 / 11


Kevin Power

16272

Revise answer list for Genotype Medication Efficacy Impact profile (LOINC 51961-1)

Waiting for Input

Motion:

On the LOINC code, change Benign to Non-Responsive.  Remove Presumed Benign. Mention on the answer list that this is from the variants effect on the drug.  Add guidance for the answers.

Refer to this profile for things like “increase/descrease dosage” as a possible candidate: http://build.fhir.org/ig/HL7/genomics-reporting/task-med-chg.html

Kevin / 2nd Julian

Discussion:

Abstain / Nay / Yes

0 / 0 / 11

Alternative suggestions on the notes below.

Bob Dolin

16253

Enhance overall understandability of CG IG

Triaged

High Level Sketch Time

 

Motion:

Mark as Deferred, but we will start drafting a new diagram

Kevin / 2nd Jamie

Discussion:

Abstain / Nay / Yey

0 / 0 / 11

High level diagram notes:

Genomic Report

“Findings” and Impacts

Genotype/Haplotypes/Described Variant

Inh disease/somatic/PGx

Overall interp

Few properties

dbSNP id/Gene ID, etc

Reference sequence

Not an example, but a structured ~list

What else??

Better description/use of the “red boxes” on our current diagrams

Clickable links!

Bob Dolin

16259

Simplify Genetic Impact

Triaged

 

Motion:

not persuasive with mod --mark the somatic impact profiles as DRAFT, the others have seen more discussion.  Alternatives in the next round of balloting would be considered.

Jamie / 2nd Joseph

Discussion: Patrick - Would be easier to merge if we had required bindings (but we don’t).

Abstain / Nay / Yes

0 / 0 / 11


Bob Dolin

 

 


Quarter: Q2

Create Decision from template

Cochair:  Bob M

Goals

Older Tracker Cleanup

Older Trackers

ID

Summary

Status

Ballot Resolution

Resolution

Submitter


SEQUENCE RESOURCE





13829

new searchable parameter: variant-start

Triaged

 

Motion: Persuasive with Mod

Clean up text in current ‘coordinate’ search param.

Rename ‘coordinate’ -> ‘chromosome-coordinate’

Create new search param:

‘reference-coordinate’:

Expression for the new search param: Sequence.reference.referenceSeqId + Sequence.variant.start + Sequence.variant.end

Do NOT add search param for structural variant start/end

Jamie / 2nd Patrick

Discussion:

Abstain / Nay / Yey

Greg / 0 / 10


Xin Liu

13830

searchable parameters for observation

Triaged

Motion: Persuasive with Mod

The items listed here are reflected as components in the new IG (except ‘ancestry*’), and default search params on Observation make component.code and component.value* searchable.

Kevin / 2nd Patrick

Discussion:

Abstain / Nay / Yey

Greg / 0 / 10


Xin Liu

13834

Add seqeunce.readdepth

Triaged

Motion: Persuasive with Mod

Change current definition of Sequence.readCoverage:

Average number of reads representing a given nucleotide in the reconstructed sequence

Average depth of coverage of the sequence

“Delayed” - additional research is required

 

https://www.nature.com/articles/nrg3642

Xin Liu

13918

Create sequence-reads profile on sequence

Triaged

NO DISCUSSION


Xin Liu

14044

Clarify Sequence.structureVariant fields

Triaged

TODO - Ask the group if anyone uses Sequence.structureVariant


Bob Dolin

15558

Sequence.type

Triaged

Motion

Persuasive: Change strength to Required

Kevin / 2nd Jamie

Discussion:

Abstain / Nay / Yey

Greg / 0 / 10


Patrik Sundberg

16553

Consider adding Sequence resource as part of the patient compartment

Triaged

NO DISCUSSION


Michael Calderero


CHANGES TO R3 PROFILE


Motion: Make a block of 13832, 13833, and 13835

Accept the proposed resolutions noting these changes have already been applied to the Genomics Reporting IG, but not to Observation-genetics in FHIR Core.

Arthur / 2nd Patrick

Discussion:

Abstain / Nay / Yey

Greg / 0 / 10



13832

rename Observation-genticsVariant to Observation-geneticsDNAVariantChange

Triaged

Persuasive with Mod

This spirit of this change has already been applied in the new IG: http://build.fhir.org/ig/HL7/genomics-reporting/obs-described-variant-definitions.html#Observation.component:variation-code

Xin Liu

13833

Make Observation-geneticsDNAVariantChange.Id cardinality from single to multiple

Triaged

Persuasive with Mod

This spirit of this change has already been applied in the new IG.  The cardinality (0..* codings) is already in our IG: http://build.fhir.org/ig/HL7/genomics-reporting/obs-described-variant-definitions.html#Observation.component:variation-code

Xin Liu

13835

Add field Observation-geneticsDNAVariantChange.Name

Triaged

Persuasive with Mod

This spirit of this change has already been applied in the new IG.  The field requested is found here: http://build.fhir.org/ig/HL7/genomics-reporting/obs-described-variant-definitions.html#Observation.component:genomic-dna-chg

Xin Liu


PROPOSED R3 PROFILES THAT MADE IT TO IG


Motion: Make a block of 14315, 14316, 14317, and 14318

Accept the proposed resolutions noting these changes have already been applied to the Genomics Reporting IG, but not to Observation-genetics in FHIR Core.

Kevin / 2nd Patrick

Discussion: 

Abstain / Nay / Yes

Greg / 0 / 10



14315

Make "Genotype" profile under Observation-genetics Profile

Triaged

Persuasive with Mod

Persuasive with Mod: Already applied as the Genotype profile in genomics-reporting IG: http://build.fhir.org/ig/HL7/genomics-reporting/obs-genotype.html  

Xin Liu

14316

Make "Haplotype" Profile under Observation-genetics profiles

Triaged

Persuasive with Mod

Persuasive with Mod: Already applied as the Haplotype profile in genomics-reporting IG: http://build.fhir.org/ig/HL7/genomics-reporting/obs-haplotype.html  

Xin Liu

14317

Make "DiscreteVariant" profile under Observation-genetics profile

Triaged

Persuasive with Mod

Persuasive with Mod: Already applied using the DescribedVariant profile in the genomics-reporting IG. http://build.fhir.org/ig/HL7/genomics-reporting/obs-described-variant.html

Xin Liu

14318

Make "StructuralVariant" profile under Observation-genetics profile

Triaged

Persuasive with Mod

Persuasive with Mod: Already applied using the DescribedVariant profile in the genomics-reporting IG. http://build.fhir.org/ig/HL7/genomics-reporting/obs-described-variant.html

Xin Liu


DOCUMENT 'Component Groups' in IG


Motion:

Block vote for 14319, 14320, 14322, 14323

Accept proposed dispositions to add documentation for grouping of the components.

 

Jamie / 2nd Arthur

Discussion:

Abstain / Nay / Yey 

Greg / 0 / 10



14319

define "VariantChange" ComponentGroup in the spec

Triaged

Persuasive with Mod

Persuasive with Mod: Add documentation describing the appropriate group of components to use together here: http://build.fhir.org/ig/HL7/genomics-reporting/obs-described-variant.html#location-properties  

Xin Liu

14320

define "GenomicLocation" ComponentGroup in the spec

Triaged

Persuasive with Mod

Persuasive with Mod: Add documentation describing the appropriate group of components to use together here: http://build.fhir.org/ig/HL7/genomics-reporting/obs-described-variant.html#location-properties (or perhaps to Computable Genetic Findings).

Xin Liu

14322

define "AllelicState" ComponentGroup in the spec

Triaged

Persuasive with Mod

Persuasive with Mod: Add documentation describing the appropriate group of components to use together here: http://build.fhir.org/ig/HL7/genomics-reporting/obs-described-variant.html#location-properties (NOTE - Zygosity is no longer on Described Variant)

Xin Liu

14323

define "AminoAcidChange" ComponentGroup in the spec

Triaged

Persuasive with Mod

Persuasive with Mod: Add documentation describing the appropriate group of components to use together here: http://build.fhir.org/ig/HL7/genomics-reporting/obs-described-variant.html#location-properties

Xin Liu

 



Quarter: Q3

Create Decision from template

Goals

Vocab/Coding systems


Ballot Comment

IDSummaryStatusBallot ResolutionResolutionSubmitter
16876Use of publically available external coding systems and autocomplete lookup tables - 2018-May Genomics #58Waiting for Input

persuasive with mod

Motion to create an appendix for Genomics Reporting IG that will contain the information contained in the HL7_V2.5.1_LRI_DTSU3_2018JUNE_CH14_CLINICAL_GENOMICS_CODE_SYSTEMS.pdf doc. Also add glstring.org code system (from Bob Milius/Joel Schneider). HTML version of this doc will be created, with recommended code system uri for each, and added guidance on it's use.

1st/2nd = Kevin/Clem

abstain/nay/yea = 0/0/11

A proposed new section on the V2 page: All of the publicly available external coding systems mentioned in this IG (and the V2 LRI chapter 14.1) are available for exploration with autocomplete lookups from the Lister Hill Clinical Table search browser that is updated monthly: https://clinicaltables.nlm.nih.gov/Clement McDonald


Discussion items

Time

Item

Who

Notes









Action items




Quarter: Q4

Create Decision from template

Goals

Wrap Up / Planning

  • Next WGM rooms
    • same days/time
  • Weekly calls - no changed to schedule - same day/time
    • freeconferencecall.com works for everyone in room, Clem will use it but prefers zoom.
  • Google Docs/announcements
    • add short readable tinyurl for all meeting docs that is reused every week
  • Deadlines
    • NIB - Sun, Oct 28 - for re-balloting IG
    • PSS - Sun, Oct 14 (not needed, we can reuse our current PSS)
    • R4 - affects Sequence resources, and other genomics profiles
      • Oct 12: All normative comments reconciled in gForge with votes and no “tracker issues” (doesnt' affect us)
      • Oct 31: All R4 STU comments reconciled in gForge with votes and no “ tracker issues”
      • Nov 1: Substantive change freeze for R4
      • Nov 11: Final content freeze, start of QA
      • Nov 25: QA finishes, start apply QA
      • Dec 2: Specification locked – no commits without permission
    • January IG ballot
      • We will allow FHIR IG content to go to ballot in January
      • If you’re balloting profiles or value sets or other artifacts, you’re balloting a FHIR IG
      • Be sure you have a good reason to go to ballot. Going to ballot with “for comment” just because there happens to be a ballot cycle is not permitted
      • Timelines, QA and tooling expectations will be strictly enforced
        • If you don’t meet the timelines, you will not go to ballot this cycle
    • FHIR IG Deadlines 
      • Oct. 17: IG proposals due (not needed for us)
      • Oct 28: NIBs due
        • IG must be “feature complete” and building in HL7’s continuous integration environment.  If not, the NIB will be refused
      • Nov 18: Content deadline – only QA changes after this point
      • Dec. 2: Final freeze deadline

ID

Summary

Status

Ballot Resolution

Resolution

Submitter

16553

Consider adding Sequence resource as part of the patient compartment

Triaged

persuasive - since sequence will not be significantly changed by R4, this should be part of Patient compartment

1st/2nd - Joseph/Patrick

abstain/nay/yea

0/0/8

(tracker updated)



Michael Calderero

13918

Create sequence-reads profile on sequence

Triaged

We had a discussion, but no motion. Seems to be related to sequence quality, but no one had an example of it's use. A link/pointer to raw reads seems useful (e.g. a pointer to something in NCBI/NIH Sequence Read Archive), and this can be done using sequence.repository, but sending the actual reads in a FHIR resource seems out of scope. We will need further explanation of what is requested.

(tracker updated)


Xin Liu

Discussion items

Time

Item

Who

Notes









Action items

  •