National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
M
Davera Gabriel
Johns Hopkins University Institute for Clinical and Translational Research
M (CSDO)
Dan Vreeman
HL7 International
O
P
Ted Klein
Klein Consulting
O
Marc Duteau
HL7 International
O
P
Joan Harper
Canada Health Infoway
O
John Snyder
National Library of Medicine
O
Rob Hausam
MITRE
O
P
Alex Kontur
ONC
O
Ravi Kafle
Washington State Department of Health
O
Abdullah Rafiqi
ICF
Antitrust statement
Professional Associations, such as HL7, which bring together competing entities are subject to strict scrutiny under applicable antitrust laws. HL7 recognizes that the antitrust laws were enacted to promote fairness in competition and, as such, supports laws against monopoly and restraints of trade and their enforcement. Each individual participating in HL7 meetings and conferences, regardless of venue, is responsible for knowing the contents of and adhering to the HL7 Antitrust Policy as stated in §05.01 of the Governance and Operations Manual (GOM).
Minutes Approved as Presented
X
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."
Agenda Topics
Meeting was recorded
Agenda Outline
Time Allocation
Lead
Agenda Item
Administrative
5
JB
Rollcall & Proxies
Note that meetings are recorded
Approval of meeting minutes
Agenda check
Status
10
JB
Discussed requirements for a web-based terminology editor tool
Should include validation and allow constraints to align for UTG/THO
Next steps are for UTG development team to write up requirements
Continuing to work with Lawrence Gerstley on Jira automation for submitters
Configured GitLab
Working on adding ability to perform automatic validation using the IG Publisher upon submission of proposed changes
New Business
30
Review Terminology Expectations presented on Co-Chair Webinar on 4/7
This is related to the section on "Workflow process for use of internal code system identifiers in FHIR and beyond"below
Is the expectation that Value Sets to be shared be in multiple places (i.e., THO and VSAC)?
What would this mean to CDA IGs, currently add content to VSAC but not THO
Use THO to unify Value Sets, as well as clean them up
Ted suggests working with FHIR guys to clean up content
Only one person has been nominated to be part of an OSG
Lisa to follow up
Michael will send link to minutes with the nominees
Jess to ask Brynn to escalate with FMG
See if AMS may be interested in being an OSG voter
Propose an additional UTG/THO subcommittee call with a dedicated focus on reviewing tickets in Consensus Review with the intent of moving them forward during Monday's TSMG
Tracked by
HSCR-155
-
Getting issue details...STATUS
and its subtasks
Email sent to Management groups on 3/8 requesting oversight group voters
Responses due by 3/31, reached out again today, 4/5
FMG has nominated John Moerke for the FHIR OSG
Remind MGs that nominees can include WG participants
Will continue to follow-up on filling Realm-based and Vocab OSGs
THO release schedule
Need input from TSC/HQ and they have requested some information from TSMG on documentation and level of effort
Info sent to Rob and Bryn who will follow up with TSC
Vocab suggests that TSMG require all code systems to have a Steward
UTG submitters would need to get WG approval from the Steward to propose changes to the code system
Discussed on main TSMG call but no one wanted to make a motion to make this a policy
Steward definition
The WG responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of the code system (not to be confused with Publisher who makes the content available)
This implies that the WG has the domain expertise/knowledge related to the code system
The primary point of contact for questions or issues with the code system
FYI: Vocab added an extension for steward, there is a proposal to update the definition of publisher (which was intended to represent steward) and remove the extension
Might be a good idea to get a count of how many code systems in THO do not have a steward value
Michael Faughn performed analysis on the number of code systems without a Steward value
Out of 797 code systems, 236 do not have a Steward value
Code systems broken out by product family:
38 V2, 147 V3, 47 FHIR, 3 unified
Current TSMG solution is to make corresponding Management Group responsible (by either having them assign the WG responsible or by assigning them to the MG itself)
In the FHIR space, it could be the resource owner
V2 - make the V2 management group responsible
V3 - will be a multi-management group exercise. CMG will take a look at the V3 sets first. FMG will take a look at the list next to determine which is the appropriate responsible party.
Austin is reviewing the list
Vocab WG to run a query for each code system across FHIR core to identify the resources and their responsible WG(s) for each listed code system.
Rob Hausam will check with Lloyd and whether and how we can do this.
Will bring this back for the Vocab call in 2 weeks.
Workflow process for use of internal code system identifiers in FHIR and beyond
Need to determine what kind of content should/should not be added to THO (i.e. if used in a balloted IG)
