Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Please review the attached WG formation request and edit this page to add a vote on behalf of your WG. Each WG gets one vote.

Voters should use edit mode to enter their name and add an "X" to the Agree or Disagree column, as well as adding any comments they or their WG may have and accept an update to the page.



Work GroupVoter NameAgree with WG FormationDisagree with WG FormationComment
Arden Syntax


Biomedical Research and RegulationHUgh Glover

We are unclear about the relationship between this proposed group and the Gravity Accelerator and its sponsoring workgroups (Patient Care and Public Health) - BR&R would like to see this clarified before we approve.

GD: 

From the PSS:

"Proposed Formal Relationships with other work groups and Accelerators: The Human Services Work Group will be intentional about identifying opportunities to cross collaborate. This work group may have work items that intersect and overlap with the following work groups: Patient Care, EHR, Public Health, Community Based Care and Privacy (CBCP), and others as identified over time.  The new work group will collaborate with other work groups on sub-domains of common interest. The goal will be to ensure ongoing communication and collaboration. The Human Services Work Group will purposely collaborate with the HL7 FHIR Accelerator, the Gravity Project, through sponsorship of upcoming Gravity use cases focused on local, state, Tribal, Territories, and federal based data capture and exchange."

Clinical Decision SupportBryn RhodesX
Strongly support formation of this Workgroup and look forward to working with them on future CDS-related use cases.
Clinical Genomics



Clinical Information Modeling Initiative Stan HuffX
CIMI is strongly in favor of the formation of this new Workgroup.
Clinical Interoperability CouncilRussell LeftwichX
CIC votes in favor.
Clinical Quality InformationFloyd EisenbergX
We support the formation of this Workgroup to bring the related communities to HL7 and support interoperability. 
Community-Based Care and PrivacyDavid PykeX
We agree with the new definition.
Conformance
X

We are not against the formation of this group.

Cross-Group Projects



Devices



Electronic Health RecordsMark Janczewskix
EHR WG would like to be an "interested party".
Emergency CareLaura HeermannX
Agree with others who identified the need for the work group to not be US specific and should look towards international engagement. 
FHIR InfrastructureLloyd McKenzieX
We would like to see non-US use-cases and at least one non-US chair.
Financial ManagementMaryKay McDanielX

Imaging IntegrationX

Voted on  

Implementable Technology SpecificationsPaul KnappX
We support the creation of a Workgroup to focus on the identified scope.
Infrastructure and Messaging



Learning Health SystemsRussell Leftwich/Bruce BrayX
  1. Concern with a risk of not having the resources to support this work group. 
Mobile Health



Modeling and MethodologyJean DuteauX

This is a good WG that can look at some of the expanding areas of healthcare.  MnM is fine with this proposal with a note that the proposal and the WG members were very US-focused.  An outreach to the international community would be very appropriate.

GD: Line is working on this. Email screen capture from Line:

Orders & ObservationsHans BuitendijkX

OO reviewed and has various questions before finalizing its vote:

  • It is unclear how this new group would relate to Public Health Workgroup and Gravity Accelerator. GD: See in PSS and Below
  • We expect a lot of use of existing resources to be profiled, rather than creating new ones. GD: We concur

We therefore seek clarification why this need to be a new workgroup rather than one or more projects within an existing workgroup.  Bandwidth of those workgroups could be a concern, but that challenge does not change and even may be more challenging having a separate workgroup that still needs the same volunteers to be successful.  One would assume this community would bring a number of new volunteers to that existing workgroup that could focus and manage that work.

Thus no concerns with the work, but rather with the need to have a new workgroup to achieve the work,

GD: This is a valid question and one the the HHS Administration for Children and Families considered. We feel the group itself will bring in "new blood" including those who have FHIR experience who work in this domain, have not heretofore been formally involved in HL7 (besides zulip) and will have more comfort in interactions and discussions and  "getting to done" than within the aforementioned groups

GD: From the PSS:

"Proposed Formal Relationships with other work groups and Accelerators: The Human Services Work Group will be intentional about identifying opportunities to cross collaborate. This work group may have work items that intersect and overlap with the following work groups: Patient Care, EHR, Public Health, Community Based Care and Privacy (CBCP), and others as identified over time.  The new work group will collaborate with other work groups on sub-domains of common interest. The goal will be to ensure ongoing communication and collaboration. The Human Services Work Group will purposely collaborate with the HL7 FHIR Accelerator, the Gravity Project, through sponsorship of upcoming Gravity use cases focused on local, state, Tribal, Territories, and federal based data capture and exchange."

Patient AdministrationLine SaeleX

Patient CareEmma JonesX
  1. Recommendation to represent an international aspects. Need international focus. 
  2. Need to clarify how to work with PCWG and PHWG 
  3. Concerns with the creation of social care and health care terminologies separately - this will be a hindrance to interoperability. Will need to work with PCWG and PHWG to avoid this issue GD: There is no intention to create separate terminologies/cos systems. Re-use wherever possible exists. However it is likely that new terms ay need to be requested from existing standard terminologies. The group will avoid inventing FHIR terms unless as temporary codes during the ballot process of projects undertaken
  4. Bandwidth issues - will this group take on work that is being done by existing groups? The same group of people will be doing the same work. 

GD: 

From the PSS:

"Proposed Formal Relationships with other work groups and Accelerators: The Human Services Work Group will be intentional about identifying opportunities to cross collaborate. This work group may have work items that intersect and overlap with the following work groups: Patient Care, EHR, Public Health, Community Based Care and Privacy (CBCP), and others as identified over time.  The new work group will collaborate with other work groups on sub-domains of common interest. The goal will be to ensure ongoing communication and collaboration. The Human Services Work Group will purposely collaborate with the HL7 FHIR Accelerator, the Gravity Project, through sponsorship of upcoming Gravity use cases focused on local, state, Tribal, Territories, and federal based data capture and exchange."

Patient EmpowermentVirginia Lorenzix

The Patient Empowerment Workgroup met and approved an endorsement on the creation of the new Human and Social Services Workgroup.
 
However, several members brought up some food for thought:

  • Several asked how does this related to CBCP - there seemed to be overlap
  • As a group with a focus on patient empowerment, PE is concerned for the patients who are impacted by disparities so there is some overlap/potential for collaboration with PE there.
  • Several wanted to know if this was international and should it be?
  • One member asked should/could the scope include refugees such as climate refugees?
  • There was a question about how social media and patient communities might fit in.
Payer/Provider Information ExchangeRussell Ottx
Vote taken 8/31
Pharmacy Melva Petersx

Suggest that the group add in non US use cases and bring in non-US participants

GD: Line is working on this. Email screen capture from Line:

Public HealthCraig Newmanx

GD: Public Health Questions from email with co-chairs:

  • Clarifying the definition/interpretation of “case management” since case management is also a process/function in public health, such as disease control at the individual level for public health threats such as highly infectious diseases.
  • Case Management is defined and used for Child Welfare, Short and Long-term foster care for children, and Adoption from foster care. The Case Management process when Child Welfare is contacted, when there is concern for a child. A Case is opened, and the child/children in question are interviewed, housing situation is evaluated, parents are evaluated, etc. If the Case Manager feels the child/children are at risk, then the child/children will be placed in temporary foster care. After further evaluation, the child/children disposition is evaluated to determine if the parents and housing is adequate for the children to be returned. From a Child Welfare perspective, this is the desired outcome. Parents are given opportunities to address drug problems, parenting problems, work opportunities, counseling, etc.
  • Clarifying the inclusion of well-child efforts and how that relates to care provided through public health, such as immunization services, pediatric health services, and other related programs, potentially including WIC.
  • Again, the intent is for the welfare of the child/children. Typically, the child/children are sent to medical facilities for assessments, etc. Currently, this information is kept separately from the Case Management system. The Case Management system, built on FHIR is intended to ingest data, in a FHIR format, so that the Case Management system has access to all relevant data for a child/children.
  • Clarifying how assessments might be treated and what types of assessments are in scope (such as, but not limited to, health risk assessments).
  • As above, Case Management does not provide assessments per se, however, it will collect notes by the Case Manager, Social workers, etc., to ensure the safety of the children. Usually, the child/children are sent to a medical facility for assessment/treatment to receive the information highlighting the child/children, mental/physical health status.
  • Providing specific examples of potential projects that would be in the workgroup’s domain instead of the CBCCP or Public Health workgroups.
  • Typically, the case management capability is used for multiple purposes, such as the Unaccompanied Children arriving at the border. A similar process is used with Child Welfare as the primary goal. Multiple agencies are involved, for example (DHS, BP, and ICE), with different data collection processes and procedures, which complicates the accurate collection of information across the process. Community Care may be used, however it is usually a contracted process, which again has to be accounted for in the Case Management process, so that ACF Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), knows the status of each child brought into care.
  • As should be clear, there is no overlap with current HL7 workgroups.
Publishing, Electronic Services, and ToolingBrian PechX

Getting more international members should be a priority for the new group.

GD: Line is working on this. Email screen capture from Line:

SecurityChris ShawnX

Services Oriented Architecture



Structured DocumentsMatt SzczepankiewiczX

Vocabulary Carmela CoudercX
See comment entered by Carmela Couderc below.
  • No labels

8 Comments

  1. There seems to be significant overlap with the declared scope of CBCP (except for the Privacy part of CBCP). Is there an intent to carve out these responsibilities from CBCP?

  2. Yes - we have met with them several times and intend to collaborate fully. These scope has been edited several times with CBCP and reviewed to be sure the difference is clear. This should be evident if scopes are compared.

  3. Vocab is ok with creating the new work group, however similar to John's comment about CBCP, we see overlap with Patient Care and Public Health work group scope, as well as with Gravity. What is the plan to coordinate with those groups?  Second the comments about international representation and participation. 

  4. From the PSS:

    "Proposed Formal Relationships with other work groups and Accelerators: The Human Services Work Group will be intentional about identifying opportunities to cross collaborate. This work group may have work items that intersect and overlap with the following work groups: Patient Care, EHR, Public Health, Community Based Care and Privacy (CBCP), and others as identified over time.  The new work group will collaborate with other work groups on sub-domains of common interest. The goal will be to ensure ongoing communication and collaboration. The Human Services Work Group will purposely collaborate with the HL7 FHIR Accelerator, the Gravity Project, through sponsorship of upcoming Gravity use cases focused on local, state, Tribal, Territories, and federal based data capture and exchange."

  5. Lloyd McKenzie - Do you have any suggestions for an international person who might like to serve as one of the assigned interim co-chairs?

    1. No.  The proponents will need to reach out to the community - perhaps start with the international council?  It's just important that the work group doesn't have an overly US-centric perspective/focus.

      1. OK. Good idea. Thanks

  6. Hello Conformance WG, Thanks for your consideration and for taking this up on a vote at the end of the month. The focus is beyond children - but IS highly focused on families, including services needed by adults to be functioning adults whether or not they have children.