Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata
Status

APPROVED

e-Vote Close Date

 

Affirm-Negative-Abstain7-1-2
Date Approved

 

Work GroupPatient Care
Project Insight ID1572
Work Groups that submitted votes

BR&R

Clinical Genomics

CIC

CQI

Devices

Emergency Care

Learning Health System

Patient Care

Pharmacy

Public Health

Work Groups that did not submit votes

Anesthesia

CBCP

CDS



  • For each Work Group, choose Affirmative, Negative, Abstain

  • If you are voting for a WG AND are also a co-chair for another WG in the CSD, please include a comment to indicate which WG you are voting on behalf of.

  • Use the  in the comments section to add comments to the vote.

  • Feel free to comment inline on Confluence documents*.

  • Negatives that do NOT have a comment will be considered abstain. Please register your vote below.

PSS: PACIO Cognitive Status


eVote Closes:  

Link to PSS: PACIO Project Cognitive Status

PBS Metrics: Yellow

Project Approval Request

Choices Your Vote Current Result: (10 Total Votes) Comments
abstain Project Approval Request
2 Votes , 20%
affirmative: I believe you have a typo in the scope."(1) determine the data model required to comprehensively exchange functional status information between health care settings,". Shouldn't functional be cognitive? - Laura
affirmative: Affirmative vote but the project needs to move to the HL7 space quickly
affirmative: Lindsey Hoggle's affirmative vote: CIC
affirmative Project Approval Request
7 Votes , 70%
negative (with comments only) Project Approval Request
1 Votes , 10%



*  Refer to Can I add comments without editing the page? for directions.

5 Comments

  1. The dates in the PSS are old and with 99% of the content is done so there doesn't seem to be any opportunity for input.

    1. Yes, there is a history to this PSS.  It should have gone through the approval steps along time ago but the process was missed so we are voting on a retroactive approval.

  2. I agree with Jim McClay.  I think it unreasonable and not in compliance with the HL7 GOM to ask co-chairs to rubber stamp projects with no visibility to what has already been done.  I will be one of the first to agree that we need more straamlined processes in HL7. But approving a PSS with most of the deadlines for the project in the past does not fall under that streamlining. I find no documentation of the work in the GitHub link, only the FHIR IG. None of the other work referred to in the PSS appears to be there. If other work has been done on the projects then the documentation of that should be linked in the PSS. I also question the indication that the ballot type is STU to Normative.  for LHS WG

    1. Hi Russell,

      The documentation of our discussions, including recordings of our meetings, can be found at https://github.com/paciowg/PACIO-Project.  We are in the process of moving these materials under the Patient Care projects in Confluence.  I'm happy to add that link to the PSS.

      We have also been updating Patient Care and Community-Based Care and Privacy with our progress for several months and our presentations are included in the meeting minutes for those groups.  Decisions made during the PACIO meetings were reviewed with our sponsoring and co-sponsoring work groups.

      Thanks!

      Dave Hill

      PACIO Project

  3. Stephen Chu - on behalf of PCWG

    It is recognized and agreed the administrative paperwork surrounding this project do not currently meet HL7s best practice. There was a hiccup within HL7 working groups and this team regarding sponsorship/co-sponsorship.   The PCWG chairs are working with the team to remedy the HL7 administrative issues.  The team has been functioning through the project with acceptable practice of announced meetings etc.  The team did not recognize the importance of the working documents to be accessible to all of the HL7 community and is working quickly to resolve that issue.