Page tree
Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata


Category

During Discovery. Before approval by the Steering Committee to move to Planning.

Current Status

Quality Measures Member Comments


Status: Complete; In-progress; Not started

Concept

WebCreate public and Member-only UC Web areas on Confluence. PM/Coordinator will help set these up using standard templates. Add content as noted below.

Partially complete because the Confluence pages are set-up, however, the content within these pages not yet finalized


Action: CodeX QM team to review home page content and update, as needed


In-progress

  • Web area is available on Confluence. working on populating quality measures content on these specific Confluence pages
Telligen:  We discussed some updates to diagrams in the terminology call.  Once the full team is able to review and we have consensus, we do not have additional updates based on currently defined scope.  As we proceed into phase 0.5 and phase 1, etc. we should be able to update a bit more on target measures, if there are specific issues/problems we can demonstrate solving in those measures, etc.  
Problem

On public page, provide a nearly complete description. References to studies regarding the quantitative and/or qualitative extent of the Problem would be helpful.

Complete 
Solution / workflowOn public page, provide, preferably, a single, proposed solution and workflow diagram (PM/Coordinator can help with graphics) around which Discovery UC Members (and those committed to join) are aligned. Should be a novel solution, but doable.

Solution – Complete 

Workflow – in-progress 

Telligen - See note above re: discussion of diagram on terminology call.  As we get further along into technical solutions, we can provide additional high-level technical architecture diagrams.  
Potential impactOn public page, provide an estimate of quantitative and/or qualitative improvements that might be realized if the solution proves successful. Categories of improvements could include better quality, less expensive/burdensome, more equitable care, research, surveillance.Complete
Scope (in addition to above and below)

Concept and solution are consistent with the vision, principles of CodeX:

  • Vision: Collect patient data once and reuse for multiple purposes
  • Domains (today): oncology, cardiovascular, genomics
  • Member-driven by key representatives of necessary stakeholders (see "Team" below)
  • Accelerate interoperable data modeling and implementation around ​

    the FHIR, HL7 standards, including CodeX products like mCODE and associated artifacts​

Discovery stage → scope in terms of high-level objectives for the broader project work


Planning stage → dedicate more time to defining tasks/goals/owners of tasks/resourcing for Phase 0

While we're in Phase 0 - follow similar approach to defining tasks/goals/owners of tasks/resourcing for Phase 0.5

  • so on and so forth..


QM use case focus is oncology






Team

Meetings

Meetings with individual, potential Members is the best way to discuss specific interests.

Schedule, as early as possible, weekly or bi-weekly public calls to build broader interest and gather ideas that help to form the Concept, Team and Plan. PM/Coordinator will help target participants and schedule.

Schedule CodeX Leadership (Paying, Gov't and Sponsored Members or those who commit) calls to consider all input and make decisions.

See meeting and messaging recommendations - Communication Rhythm



Member leadershipAt least 1 "Member Champion", who commits to lead concept and planning alignment, engagement of stakeholders, etc.  Add names to public CodeX Confluence page.

Member representatives of necessary stakeholders and actorsAdditional CodeX Members at any level or those who commit, such that there is at least 1 organization to fill each stakeholder/actor role in the UC.

Resources requested from the CodeX Member-fee budget (in addition to the in-kind resources to be provided from UC participants)

Estimate of full-time equivalent (FTE) resources (and skills) being requested to be funded from the CodeX Member-fee-based budget (e.g., funding from CodeX Membership fees paid to HL7). These are resources that are not likely to be provided through in-kind support from UC participants.

Note: Experience suggests that a minimum of 0.25- 0.5 FTE for a UC Coordinator plus 0.1-0.2 FTE for overarching PM support (engagement, governance, communications, education) is important to moving fast and in an organized fashion. If additional expertise is required for terminology, FHIR, architecture, software development, pilot planning/execution, etc.,  another 0.5 - 2.0 FTE could be needed.  



Sufficient Member-fee and/or grant funding and/or Member in-kind resources (to meet the request in the previous row)

List of specific, potential UC participants who are not yet Members or not committed to join.

Note: For resources that are needed, but not provided as in-kind support, assume that $150K or more of funding could be need through new paying Membership, grant funding and/or through freeing up of resources from existing and/or ending UCs.



Note re: Health Systems: While health systems are most welcome to join CodeX at any level, we are not requiring health systems to formally join CodeX in order to participate in implementations, pilots and other non-decision-making, but important work. 
Outside initiativesConsortia or other organizations outside of CodeX with which the UC may want to interface, coordinate or partner, or at least remain aware of. Could be competitive.





Plan

Agile, short Phases and success metrics for each PhaseOn the public page, list draft, high-level time-frames for Planning work and initial Phases during Execution.

HL7 FHIR IGs

Roughly, how existing FHIR IG might be used or updated.

Initial thoughts on the need to develop new IGs as stand-alone artifacts and/or supplementary to existing specific IGs, working with existing HL7 WGs and/or outside organizations, complex terminology work, balloting in HL7, etc.



Implementation in health information systems

Existing IT systems that might be candidates to be updated to support existing/new FHIR IGs and functionality during pilots.

New systems that  might need to be developed.



Piloting in real-world settingsInitial thoughts on the location and nature of pilots, preferable sharing data across real-world settings.

RisksThe most important, potential challenges to success.  For example, divergent views in the community, competing efforts, insufficient resources, technical or clinical barriers, legal work, etc.    

Adoption and scalingAssuming successful pilots, the 3-5 most important challenges to be addressed to gain adoption and scale for impact.





Aligning and Decision-Making
Meetings within the UCExperience has shown that a combination of some public and separate Member-only meetings is a good way to build broad interest, receive broad input, gain engagement and commitment, and still leverage Member meetings to make decisions.

Decisions within the UCDecision makers (approval of all of the above) must be CodeX paying, Gov't and/or Sponsored Members or must submit written commitment to join at one of these levels if/when the UC transitions to Executing.

Decision regarding move to the next Stage
  • UC leaders requests that PM start process of considering transition to Planning, based on input to requirements above.
  • PM acknowledges receipt of request to proposer.
  • PM, within ~1 business day of acknowledging receipt, informs the OC and SC
  • OC and SC have ~5 business days to express concerns about moving the UC to Planning.
  • PM discusses any concerns with the proposer and the OC/SC, and is responsible for disposing of issues and informing all parties as to whether the proposed UC can move into Planning or not (with reasons).


  • No labels