Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Facilitator

Andrew Statler

Date:


Quarter:

1


Location:

M102


Attendees:

SDWG Attendence Sheet - http://hl7.me/SDWGMA)  Joint with CDA-MG


From Agenda:

  • C-CDA IAT Report Out
  • CDA Roadmap Presentation
  • Discuss Plan for the next steps of the Quality Criteria
  • FHIR gForge Issues #19873

Notes/Minutes


  • C-CDA IAT Report Out
    • 26 attended, 18 companies - 28 sample documents were provided 
    • Creation and consumption - combination of content and workflow. 
    • Time zones, narrative text linking, provedence
    • Section time range looks to be effective 
    • CDA Rubrics UA review
    • Lisa - the best realtime place for conversations are in the samples task force meetings, outside the IAT.
      • Maybe need to have virtual meetings.  There was an HIE presence, but less EHRs were present.
      • SSA, NCQA - big players are wanting the data.  The data needs to be better and cleaner. 
      • SSA & NCQA have their dream data samples. There are issues of holding individuals in the room when competing with FHIR.
      • Would it be easier to hold virtual meeting.  The group discussed that it might be reasonable to use the Examples Taskforce. 
      • Life Cycle - on CDA and C-CDA templates, seem to be coming towards productivity in its life cycle.  So it seems that making it a little bit better.  
      • There are HIE meetings, where the topics might be reason.  
      • IAT - concerns over the past couple of years.  We have a bunch of concepts, where we may not have a consistent location to place them the document.  
        • Here is a concept and here is where we place the information in the document. 
        • There are other topics, for innovation - where to place unsuccessful attempts outcomes.  There are concepts like that which need to be modeled and need to placed for that.  The IAT needs to evolve to manage the bigger topics.  Here is a new concept that we might want to develop.   The Care Plans is an area that needs to be worked on.  Identify the things that don't interoperate well that we need to work on.
        • Is there a place / way to capture - do we change the focus to capture the business concepts that need to be added, and then work on how to put them into the CDA / C-CDA documents. 
        • Another issues, there is a new concept where there is a new concept that needs to be added, we need to process or service that supports how to manage the new data.
  • CDA Roadmap Presentation
    • HL7 CDA logo was shared. 
    • The 3 year product plan was identified.  
  • Discuss Plan for the next steps of the Quality Criteria
    • Quality Criteria - should be wrapped up this week and shortly after, the workgroup would hand it over to the management group (next month) as the quality criteria. There is a quality check list that needs to be created, management groups are responsible for the creation of the check list and they can add additional items that can be added as needed.  Questions about the various check lists that were required.  The question about template and IG maturity models. 
    • Question about the quality - and can there be funding for the quality checks.  Could every IG have 10 hours of quality review to content. 
    • Calvin asked if we need to create a bounty for finding issues and bugs (substantive issues) with IGs.
  • FHIR gForge Issues #19873
  • Lisa makes a motion to revise the PACP Normative Ballot at this to STU.  Second Gay 
    • Opposed: 0 Abstain: 2  For: 15 motion passes.  Once patient care approves the request it can be submitted to the TSC.
    •  

Copyright © Health Level Seven International ® ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. The reproduction of this material in any form is strictly forbidden without the written permission of the publisher.