Note Taker: Anne Wizauer
|Constable Consulting Inc.|
|x||Parker Digital Health Computing|
|x||Blue Wave Informatics|
|x||Deontik Pty Ltd|
|x||CANA Software and Service Ltd|
Meeting Minutes from Discussion
|Management||Minute Approval||Reviewed minutes||Accepted via general consent|
ArB Update on the VRDR FHIR IG/PSS (30 Minutes )
AMS here to provide the update. There is a large body of work they are making re-use of from the MITRE group. ARB had wondered how much of that material was going to re-use. As the work went forward, they were able to use less than anticipated. Instead of 60% of the material, they are using about 1/3. There is no IP attached to this because the MITRE group did the work for the CDC and it is in the common domain. Discussion over lessons learned for future projects. Will go to ballot in May if the FMG criteria has been met. Should make sure that we use this experience to improve other things downstream.
|FHIRcast||Isaac reports that they'll be talking to InM at the end of the month about cosponsoring. TSC thought it would be reasonable to go ahead with the NIB in the meantime. Discussion over whether the material is external content or not. Information coming out of TSC yesterday indicated that they thought that it wasn't. Decision that ARB will still take a look at it on 2019-03-05. Elliot and Isaac will both plan to attend.|
|Continued review of RTSS content(15 Minutes)|
Ron discusses project. Aims to understand what is actually an international standard. Inclusion of participants from more than one country is not a logical conclusion. What is more important are the characteristics of the work being done in terms of usability. International candidacy should be dependent on form. Lorraine notes that our goal was always to work on international standards unless otherwise declared, and this is coming from the opposite direction. Hugh: Standards being seen as candidate international standards make sense, although not sure how you make that distinction. Ron: Intent is important; having criteria regarding what makes it realm transferable or not would be helpful. Also, certain things that are realm specific probably should be balloted within realm instead of international. there would then be sub-ballots for FHIR implementation guides, for example. A US affiliate could help to clarify these issues. Hugh: There is a substantial chunk of work going on which has pushed the standard forward; in reality, lots of people in the smaller or newer affiliates will tend to refer to something that is US, but they can use it. There's a risk that stuff could go into a US Affiliate and be less visible as a consequence. We need to ballot stuff with much clearer markers on what would have to be customized.
ARB should focus on the characteristics. AMS suggests looking lower than the IG level. Sometimes the profiles are reusable in other domains.
|Continued review of RTSS PSS (15 Minutes)|
Last week we discussed if SGB and International Council should be cosponsors.
Need and Scope should be updated before going to TSC. Really looking at defining characteristics; also, when something is balloted as a candidate Universal standard, it's picking out those things that are hooks for localization.
|JIRA issue AG-48: Identify the value of each committee review step, and where the function would reside if that review step was eliminated.||Defer to 3/5/19|
|Management||Next agenda||Review of FHIR Bulk Data project|
|Adjournment||Adjourned at 3:58 PM Eastern|
|Minute Approval||2019-02-12 ARB Agenda/Minutes|
VRDR FHIR IG/PSS Update &
|Realm Transferable PSS||RTSS PSS Decision&Documents|