Chairs: Virginia Lorenzi, Debi Willis
Scribe: Dave deBronkart
|Dave deBronkart||Dave deBronkart||x|
|Jose Costa Teixeira|
|Casey Thompson||Casey R. Thompson||x|
|Didi Davis - VP @ Sequoia Project|
|Laura Bright (OneRecord)|
Meeting Minutes from Discussion
|Announcement||Rachel Richesson has students in last semester of a 2 year nursing informatics program who may be able to help. Reach out to her.|
|Organization||Approval of this Agenda||done|
|Prior call Minutes (7/9/20) approval||done|
|10 min||It's HL7 election time - through end of July.|
PE WG projects
|Instead of covering all 4 projects weekly, with a tiny time slot for each, your co-chairs decided we'll grant time slots each week to whoever has something to present. Default for now will be 1-2 projects each week, alternating as the need arises.|
Updated WG priorities document is here - reformatted to clarify next steps for each. Please review!
Co-chairs (led by Virginia) will be shepherding our two PSS's through the HL7 process
|Corrections to the Record (Debi & Abigail)|
We'd like to learn of various workflows, to support automating them in FHIR. Simple example with my (Dave deBronkart's) PCP: (just had this happen)
Notes from the meeting:
Lisa Nelson tells us that some HL7 project proposals take the form of patient stories ("user stories" ... which explain how the project will deliver value). My example above is a very condensed example or outline of one. Need to find the HL7 page on user stories
Ultimately we figure this will lead to an implementation guide (IG) but Lisa warns it can be a big big project. Better to start with a smaller part of the elephant.
Debi shared Patient requests to amend PHI implementation specs HIPAA and GDPR.docx (in our WG's Documents sidebar) - a visual representation of the sequence of events for the US "implementation sequence" - how the process works in the US, with notes on difference with GDPR.
Possible patient examples cited:
Lloyd: 2 approaches to corrections - "please make this change in this record" vs "here is the full corrected record" ... we need to be clear about the difference, & different business processes. Abigail: also second opinion consultations, and import/export to/from a previous provider's system.
Did not get to this - carry forward to next week
But add this from today's discussion of Corrections, above:
Jan notes that we should (in a white paper?) take into account the evolving practice of OurNotes (co-generated visit notes). (Dave thought: imagine the drafting and evolution of a visit note in the same way people collaborate on a Google Doc before its release ... or should this belong under patient CONTRIBUTED data below??)
New note: Purpose suggested by Virginia in the PSS: "to define patient contributed data and the work done to standardize interoperability in the field up to this point as well as consideration of gaps and needs and recommendations)"
|HL7 process (if time allows)|
Write a comment…
This is to approve minutes via general consent. "You have received the minutes. Are there any corrections to the minutes? (pause) Hearing none, if there are no objections, the minutes are approved as printed."
Meeting Minutes from Discussion
|Decision Link(if not child)|