Rad Tech Minutes 2018-11-12 to 2018-11-15

From IHE Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Monday, Nov 12, 2018: 8:15 am - 5:00 pm CST Minutes

IHE Radiology Technical Committee Roster
08:15-08:30: Breakfast, Welcome, Patent Disclosure Announcement, Agenda Review
  • Attendees-in person
    • Kinson Ho
    • Wim Corbijn
    • Antje Schroeder
    • Jonathan Whitby
    • Kevin O'Donnell
    • Hamid Neshat
    • Salt
    • Eliot Silver
    • Mauro Zanardini
    • Chris Carr
    • Nichole Knox
  • Attendees-via WebEx
    • Lynn Felhofer
    • Dave Kwan
    • Teri Sippel Schmidt
08:30-10:30: Import and Display of External Priors (2)
  • Open issues documented directly into document.
10:30-12:00: Encounter-based Imaging Workflow for Lightweight Devices (1.5)
  • Open issues documented directly into document
12:00-13:00: Lunch
13:00-15:00: Technical Framework Maintenance - Identify CPs to focus on this week, CP Ballot Review (2)
  • The 5 CPs from ballot to final text are CP-RAD-262, 320, 352, 400 and 405.
  • The two new CPs reviewed are 411 (assigned) and 412 (rejected)


15:00-17:00: Import and Display of External Priors (4)
  • Open issues documented directly into document

Tuesday, Nov 13, 2018: 8:15 am - 5:00 pm CST

IHE Radiology Technical Committee Roster
08:15-08:30: Breakfast, Welcome, Patent Disclosure Announcement, Agenda Review
  • Attendees-in person
    • Kinson Ho
    • Wim Corbijn
    • Antje Schroeder
    • Jonathan Whitby
    • Kevin O'Donnell
    • Hamid Neshat
    • Salt
    • Eliot Silver
    • Nichole Knox
  • Attendees-via WebEx
    • Lynn Felhofer
    • Dave Kwan
    • Teri Sippel Schmidt
    • Jason Nagels
    • Hans Buitendijk
    • Danield Rutz
    • Tim Howe
    • Michelle (from Cerner)
    • Maddie Mailly
08:30-10:30: Encounter-based Imaging Workflow for Lightweight Devices (3.5)
    • Open issues documented directly into document
10:30-12:00: Import and Display of External Priors (5.5)
    • Open issues documented directly into document
12:00-13:00: Lunch
13:00-15:00: Technical Framework Maintenance (4) - Review CDS-OAT updates with Hans
  • Hans and Michelle will send updated version to group by end of this week
  • Based on Lynn's updates, will schedule time for tech committee to review.
  • Will need 1-2 more rounds of reviews
  • Someone from Rad TC will need to prepare a CP with proper CP change syntax
  • Rad TC will need another review to make sure CP is done correctly based on changes.
  • CP will be ready for Public Comment
  • Rad TC will review ballot comments, make necessary changes and incorporated in CDS-OAT Final Text.
  • Vendors interested in implementing will be interested in ballot review to provide comments and make sure all technical details are there.
  • Kinson and Wim will look at CP schedule to determine where to fit in.
15:00-17:00: Import and Display of External Priors (7.5)

Wednesday, Nov 14, 2018: 8:15 am - 5:00 pm CST

IHE Radiology Technical Committee Roster
08:15-08:30: Breakfast, Welcome, Patent Disclosure Announcement, Agenda Review
08:30-10:30: Technical Framework Maintenance (2) - Focus on SWF.b CPs
10:30-12:00: Encounter-based Imaging Workflow for Lightweight Devices (1.5)
12:00-13:00: Lunch
13:00-13:30: Scheduling and Maintenance
13:30-15:00: Import and Display of External Priors (1.5)
15:00-15:30: Encounter-based Imaging Workflow for Lightweight Devices (0.5)
15:30-
16:00-17:00: Group mtg with QRPH/ITI/PCC

Thursday, Nov 15, 2018: 8.15 am - 3:00 pm CST

IHE Radiology Technical Committee Roster
08:15-08:30: Breakfast, Welcome, Patent Disclosure Announcement, Agenda Review
08:30-11:00: Technical Framework Maintenance (2.5) - Finalize PDI / XDM CP for ballot
11:00-12:00: Import and Display of External Priors (1)
12:00-12:30: Lunch
12:30-14:00: Closing Assessment (1.5)
Closing evaluation: Profile_Development_Process_for_First_Timers#Annex:_Kickoff_Closing_Assessment


Closing Assessment

Template: Profile_Development_Process_for_First_Timers#Annex:_Kickoff_Closing_Assessment

IDEP Assessment

  • IDEP Profile: Import and Display of External Priors
    • Describe gaps in Use Case coverage
      • Not really. Two runs at the profile have resulted in good coverage.
    • Is there a resolution plan for all the "uncertainty points" from the evaluation
      • Added them all to the open issues and most/all have been closed or have an agreed plan for resolution coming into the PC meeting.
    • Do the "effort points" still seem about right
      • Mostly. Used a bit less than the allocated time, but also added a good list of TODOs.
    • Describe unresolved technical issues/tasks
      • There's a good list of todo items (see the todo section of the profile document) but technical issues have mostly been resolved with a plan forward and open issue for PC as necessary.
    • Describe potential practical issues
      • For the Report import use case, the expectations are a bit of a burden on sites with legacy infrastructure to make their report repository queryable but really there's no way to avoid it.
      • Possible problems with access control for queries to external systems? C-FIND is mostly open or closed but sites might want more nuanced control?
    • Does the open issue list feel complete
      • Yes actually. Lurking suspicion that things are too quiet now, but can't think of any other critical issues.
    • Which open issues feel most risky
      • None are very risky. Kinson's simulation is probably the most risky but even that doesn't feel too bad.
    • How is the work fitting in the allocated bandwidth? (Time to spare? Just right? Things were left undone?)
      • About right, a bit of time to spare.
    • How does the scope feel? (Room to expand? Just right? Pretty ambitious?)
      • About right thanks to the work last cycle. It was tricky to get here, but this is the right place to be.
    • If you had to reduce scope, what would you drop?
      • XDS - it's optional and has some of the more complex bits.
    • Have the promised resources manifested?
      • Mostly yes.
    • What tasks would benefit from additional expertise?
      • Can't think of any. Maybe a bit of XDM deployment experience re viability of reqs.
    • Are vendors engaged for key actors? How many?
      • Image Manager - 3, ... nothing really new
      • Importer - 3, ...
      • Remote MHD Responder - 2, ...
    • How many tcons would you like between now and the PC Prep Meeting?
      • One (scheduled)

EBIW-II Assessment

  • EBIW-II Profile: Encounter-Based Imaging Workflow for Lightweight Devices
    • Describe gaps in Use Case coverage
      • Feels pretty complete. Open issue asking for other devices that could/should be covered. (Surgical suite cameras?)
    • Is there a resolution plan for all the "uncertainty points" from the evaluation
      • Mostly yes. Need to assign homework to review SWF related profiles for possible CPing.
    • Do the "effort points" still seem about right
      • Slight increase with doing dual mechanism text writing (which was partly predicted), but otherwise seems right and a couple uncertainly/complexity were resolved simply.
    • Describe unresolved technical issues/tasks
      • Pretty much have an action plan for all the issues. Main would be the mappings for FHIR which will be worked up for PC.
      • Addressing RAW/Lossless vs Lossy compressed storage. Also covered in Open Issue.
    • Describe potential practical issues
      • As with EBIW-I, the method for getting Patient/Encounter metadata is left to the Encounter Manager, they'll likely need to group with something and we list a variety of things they could effectively group with, but we deliberately did not mandate a baseline. Is this openness an issue?
    • Does the open issue list feel complete
      • Mostly yes.
    • Which open issues feel most risky
      • DICOMweb vs FHIR question.
        • If we choose the FHIR route it will add complexity points to those transactions as we climb the learning curve.
      • There are a number of topics in the Concepts section so if there a lot of comments that could eat up time.
    • How is the work fitting in the allocated bandwidth? (Time to spare? Just right? Things were left undone?)
      • About right. Time to spare this meeting, next meeting will likely be full.
    • How does the scope feel? (Room to expand? Just right? Pretty ambitious?)
      • Mostly right but the multi-mechanism is a bit of creep. Will focus on resolving in Jan.
    • If you had to reduce scope, what would you drop?
      • (Multi-mechanisms)
    • Have the promised resources manifested?
      • Missing the EBIW user protagonists on tcon - need to beat bushes for next meeting.
    • What tasks would benefit from additional expertise?
      • More FHIR expertise would help - Elliot and Jonathan have been contributing, but some resources and deeper details need calling external experts.
      • Given that we are keeping RAW off the table, don't need RAW experts.
      • Would be nice to get people (clinicians) specifically doing point of care photography. Get for PC review, and preferably also on tcon for the meeting.
    • What vendors are engaged for each actor?
      • Encounter Manager - 3, ...
      • Lightweight Modality - 1, ... - try some outreach. At RSNA?
      • Image Manager - 3, ...
    • How many tcons would you like between now and the PC Prep Meeting?
      • One (scheduled)