QRPH Minutes 2010 04 27

From IHE Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Attendees

  • Ana Estelrich - ASIP Sante
  • Anna Orlova - PHDSC
  • Akaki Lekiachvili, MD, MBA - CDC
  • Amit Popat - Epic
  • Arun Srinivasan - CDC
  • Charles Rica - ASIP Sante
  • Chris Carr - RSNA
  • Harry Solomon - GE Healthcare
  • John Eichwald - CDC
  • John Donnelly
  • Jane Whipple
  • Landen Bain - CDISC
  • Lori Fourquet -
  • Michelle Williamson - CDC
  • Michelle Siefert
  • Patty Craig - HIMSS
  • Steve Moore - MIR
  • Teresa Finitzo -
  • Tobias Pass - Tiani Spirit
  • Wendy Blumenthal - CDC
  • Wendy Scharber - Registry Widgets


Minutes

MCH Profile – Update - Dr. Charles Rica, Michelle Williamson, Hetty Khan

  • The modifications in the Glossary were made

The 42 comments in the Excel sheets from CDC were integrated. This will be documentes as only one change proposal submitted by Michelle Williamson and Dr. Rica and logged in for documentation purposes (the excel sheet will be attached to them). The open issue as to the child’s place of birth was resolved.

Redaction Services – Update - Landen Bain

  • Working on restructuring the document

Need some help on the Message Semantics section (enlisted Amit’s help).

RPE change proposals - Marc Aratoon


EDHI - Terese Finitzo, Anna Orlova, John Eichwald

  • Based on the national use cases in US.
  • To be done
    • Data set cross-mapping with MCH profile and the New Born Discharge profile (but the data elements are not sufficiently defined)
    • Data elements are not sufficient (must have a list of data elements to be mapped onto CDA content modules) and QRPH content modules.
    • Filling in the column with the appropriate information for the trigger
    • Discuss the steps on the care plan, take out the financial information. What is the relationship with PPOC profile in PCC?

The purpose of this profile is not clear, seeming a mixture of workflow transactiosn and content, similar to some profiles in Radiology.

Recommendation:

  • Try to separate the transactions and the contents. RPE profile was sent to the Anna and Teresa in order to better define actor and transactions (reduce the workflow).
  • Recommendation: Use RPE, then get into the semantics of the transactions which still need to be written. It seems that this is a process specification profile.

Cancer Registry - Wendy Scharber, Wendy Blumenthal

  • Profile well advanced.
  • Started to look at the German proposal from Frank Oemig. Wendy Scharber appreciates the work done and the table of codes, which is very helpful for a content profile.
  • Collaborative work with Germany, Wendy would like to get a copy in English of the paper presented by Frank Oemig, Frank agreed.
  • Questions as to how to write a header for a content profile – should this point to CDA4CDT header or should it list all conformance statements.
  • Good exercise to understand what goes into the header, not sure if need by implementers, is this extra work that does not need to get done considering the tight deadline (retrospective note: asked Keith off-line and he suggested that if they are already written, not to delete them.)
  • Must note that different documents will have some special requirements for the header.
  • Frank will work with Wendy in exchanging information.


Public Health Case Reporting - John Abellera, Arun Srinivasan.

  • Change proposal to the RPE?. A change proposal needs to be written.
  • Goal: Map some of these RPE to the activities of the public case scenario. The group is in touch with Mark. Question: Can this be applied to other circumstances such as the Cancer Registry or Research?
  • Quality can be described as strictly RPE with no content, and EDHI has a different workflow.
  • All the actors and transactions were identified – see presentation done by Arun S – XXXXXXX (please put on the ftp or email) – (need presentation sent). Following the presentation, it appears that the use case was adapted to the RPE.
  • Next steps:
    • Cross-reference with RPE, and see if there is a need to describe the actors that are not directly involved. Can the alerts become part of the use-case?
    • Work with the Cancer Registry profile to see if the use case cannot be generalized.
    • Proposal – create an implementation white paper, keeping in mind that the semantics in the RPE might change. The white paper would show implementation how to use RPE within a special context. Has RPE been already modified to reflect these changes since the editors are in touch with each other? RPE version 2 will be reviewed.
    • Check if RPE version 2 reflects the changes requested.
  • Final proposal: Create User Handbook for Public Health Case Reporting within the QRPH domain using RPE and RFD.
  • Note: Could this be the beginning of the beginning of the technical framework for QRPH?

Joing meeting ITI/PCC/QPRH

  • Nested folders
Retrieved from "http://wiki.ihe.net/index.php?title=QRPH_Minutes_2010_04_27&oldid=41954"