Rad Tech Minutes 2024-06-04-07: Difference between revisions

From IHE Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
← Older edit
Kevino (talk | contribs)
editor
4,951 edits
No edit summary
 
(2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 51: Line 51:
:*S2: 3:00pm-4:00pm: Maintenance  
:*S2: 3:00pm-4:00pm: Maintenance  
:** Feedback on IRA connect-a-thon experience
:** Feedback on IRA connect-a-thon experience
:*** [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1E58cruzlDKL_HHbyLZZJkGqJi1F6NLJsMPb1k1EqSdM/edit?usp=sharing]
:** Review the Work Item for XCA-I.b profile (CP)
:** Review the Work Item for XCA-I.b profile (CP)
:*A2: 3:45pm-4:00pm: Break
:*A2: 3:45pm-4:00pm: Break
Line 65: Line 66:
:**[https://www.ihe.net/about_ihe/patent_disclosure_process/ IHE Patent Disclosure]
:**[https://www.ihe.net/about_ihe/patent_disclosure_process/ IHE Patent Disclosure]
:*S1: 8:45am-10:00am: Imaging Diagnostic Report (IDR)
:*S1: 8:45am-10:00am: Imaging Diagnostic Report (IDR)
:*S2: 10:00am-10:30am: Maintenance (Plugathon Report Out)  
:*S2: 10:00am-10:30am: Maintenance (Plugathon Report Out)
:*S3: 10:30am-11:30am: Imaging Diagnostic Report (IDR)
:* Break   
:*S3: 10:45am-11:30am: Imaging Diagnostic Report (IDR)
:*A2: 11:30am-12:00pm: Administrative
:*A2: 11:30am-12:00pm: Administrative
:** Checkpoint Assessments; T-Con Scheduling
:** Checkpoint Assessments; T-Con Scheduling
Line 93: Line 95:
:** CP-RAD-305-02 - Revise profile dependencies (grouping) in Vol 1) (Lynn) -- cmte input needed; do it, or kill it...
:** CP-RAD-305-02 - Revise profile dependencies (grouping) in Vol 1) (Lynn) -- cmte input needed; do it, or kill it...
:** CP-RAD-436-02 - Fix inconsistencies in IOCM actor / transaction and grouping requirements (Lynn) -- cmte input needed
:** CP-RAD-436-02 - Fix inconsistencies in IOCM actor / transaction and grouping requirements (Lynn) -- cmte input needed
=='''Summary of discussions and decisions'''==
:* IDR Profile
:** IDR PC comments were discussed, not all were finalized during the meeting.
:** The inputs made clear that discussions with the related FHIR groups is necessary, for this Kevin already started the discussion to give follow up in a Gemini project.
:*** The proposal is made and in principle accepted.
:*** An important element is that the IIG currently is not in favor for extensions to the resource to handle the different sections that IDR has in mind like Conclusion.
:*** To get this accepted we need full support from Radiologist with sufficient "power". Other feedback also made clear that other ologies are looking for different sections in a report.
:** Coming to the TI version of the profile will take at least through the end of the year, as this is done together with the FHIR teams in a Gemini project; thus there is no real option to not continue the development as the cycle has ended. The continuous effort will be done through teleconferences.
:* Plugathon feedback
:** The Plugathon team had feedback on the available profiles and missing parts.
:** Marc presented the workflow used and the pain points found during implementing this.
:** How to get to the data by the use of Query was one of the issues as many PACS systems didn't allow querying.
:** This means that one of the open issues is how to get to the relevant input data for the AI applications.
:** For the pain points the team will submit proposals for the development of profiles.
:** We should accept one for further development this cycle to support the team activities.
:* Multi Country Working Group (MCWG)
:** The MCWG is focusing on the exchange of Image data in the context of EHDS in Europe and in Canada.
:** 5 very active countries that have implemented part of the pipeline already. 4 or 5 more that are participating but not have real implementations yet.
:** The team wants to avoid the usage of the Query interface for several reasons, however during the workgroup meeting there was quite some opposition.
:** One of the reasons is that they wanted to use a KOS objects that summarizes the most important objects of the Study. These could then be retrieved directly.
:** Problem for this is that for all current history these KOS objects are not available, and also links will change due to security measures.
:** To get a clear view on the workflows and use cases the proposal is to create a whitepaper which can then be used for getting the required profile developments clear.
:** We want to support the creation of this whitepaper, it would also give clarity on some of the questions from the Plugathon team on Query and Access to Image data.
:* IRA feedback
:** IRA was tested by two teams: AGFA and RadAI
:** Overall it was not too difficult to get is working, it seems.
:** Several small possible improvements/extensions were mentioned. (don't have overview of them)
:** Tests are based on the FHIR R4, and the opinion was expressed that there may be a challenge for developers to move to R5 because of incompatibilities between the two versions.
:** Putting more extensions on R4 is probably not something that FHIR groups will entertain yet the field may be much in favor of using something stable than new and incompatible.
:** Obvious risk is that more extension elevate the risk of more proprietary solutions that may threaten interoperability. We need to look more into the known incompatibilities and decide what route the profiling of FHIR should take both in the IRA context and the IDR context or future reporting-related profiles.
:** No direct follow up required.
:* Directions for Coming year
As we have momentum for the below items, we need to follow up on these in the coming development cycle.
:** IDR development will continue under the Gemini flag - see proposal from Kevin.
:** Expectation is that this will take at least till end of the year, meaning TI is not expected before then
:** Plugathon team will come with at least one profile proposal, for this we want to use the momentum, and this means we should accept that for development. The team will be main editor.
:** MCWG has feedback on some profiles and available interfaces, discussions let to the insight that more clarification for the real workflows is required.
:** Proposal is to create a whitepaper to get the full overview of interfaces and way of working, this will be using also MCWG resources.
:** IRA feedback follow up?

Latest revision as of 20:45, 29 January 2025

Quick Links

Join Zoom Meeting https://rsna-org.zoom.us/j/85772738480?pwd=SYVOxEbeoZ9SxFZ94Ad8KJALtbTz3b.1


Tuesday, June 4, 2024

UMBERTO SABA Room All Times CEST

Wednesday, June 5, 2024

UMBERTO SABA Room All Times CEST

  • A1: 2:00pm-2:15pm Administrative Time
  • S1: 2:15pm-3:00pm: European Digital Strategy
  • S2: 3:00pm-3:45pm: Imaging Diagnostic Report (IDR)
  • A2: 3:45pm-4:15pm: Break
  • S3: 4:15pm-5:00pm: Imaging Diagnostic Report (IDR)
  • C1: 5:00pm-6:00pm: Imaging Diagnostic Report (IDR)

Thursday, June 6, 2024

VIP Room All Times CEST

  • A1: 2:00pm-2:15pm Administrative Time
  • S1: 2:15pm-3:00pm: Imaging Diagnostic Report (IDR)
  • S2: 3:00pm-4:00pm: Maintenance
    • Feedback on IRA connect-a-thon experience
    • Review the Work Item for XCA-I.b profile (CP)
  • A2: 3:45pm-4:00pm: Break
  • S3: 4:00pm-5:00pm: Imaging Diagnostic Report (IDR)
  • C1: 5:00pm-6:00pm: Clinical Consult

Friday, June 7, 2024

ITALO SVEVO Room All Times CEST

Maintenance topics for the week

Link to RAD CP Tracking sheet

Link to RAD TF Maintenance folder in google drive

Maintenance topics (Tentative):

  • CP-related discussion topics for committee deliberation
  • CP-RAD-530 XCA-I. - profile proposal for the WADO-RS based profile synced with latest updates to XCA-I
    • CP-RAD-410-03 - XCA-I is out of date for Async (Lynn) - incorporate into the new profile?
  • Finalize content and timing of next CP ballot


  • Other CPs ready for committee review (Time permitting):
    • CP-RAD-423 Add specificity to IOCM (unreject) (Steve)
    • CP-RAD-463 - Add RDSR Display option in REM (Kevin)
    • CP-RAD-478-01 - Remove out-of-date references to DICOM and supplement (Lynn)
    • CP-RAD-515-01 - Vol 2x: Fully integrate SWF.b into Appendix D (Lynn) -- cmte input needed
    • CP-RAD-483-00 - Deprecate PWF transactions (Lynn) -- get go-ahead from RAD Tech to do this
    • CP-RAD-305-02 - Revise profile dependencies (grouping) in Vol 1) (Lynn) -- cmte input needed; do it, or kill it...
    • CP-RAD-436-02 - Fix inconsistencies in IOCM actor / transaction and grouping requirements (Lynn) -- cmte input needed

Summary of discussions and decisions

  • IDR Profile
    • IDR PC comments were discussed, not all were finalized during the meeting.
    • The inputs made clear that discussions with the related FHIR groups is necessary, for this Kevin already started the discussion to give follow up in a Gemini project.
      • The proposal is made and in principle accepted.
      • An important element is that the IIG currently is not in favor for extensions to the resource to handle the different sections that IDR has in mind like Conclusion.
      • To get this accepted we need full support from Radiologist with sufficient "power". Other feedback also made clear that other ologies are looking for different sections in a report.
    • Coming to the TI version of the profile will take at least through the end of the year, as this is done together with the FHIR teams in a Gemini project; thus there is no real option to not continue the development as the cycle has ended. The continuous effort will be done through teleconferences.
  • Plugathon feedback
    • The Plugathon team had feedback on the available profiles and missing parts.
    • Marc presented the workflow used and the pain points found during implementing this.
    • How to get to the data by the use of Query was one of the issues as many PACS systems didn't allow querying.
    • This means that one of the open issues is how to get to the relevant input data for the AI applications.
    • For the pain points the team will submit proposals for the development of profiles.
    • We should accept one for further development this cycle to support the team activities.
  • Multi Country Working Group (MCWG)
    • The MCWG is focusing on the exchange of Image data in the context of EHDS in Europe and in Canada.
    • 5 very active countries that have implemented part of the pipeline already. 4 or 5 more that are participating but not have real implementations yet.
    • The team wants to avoid the usage of the Query interface for several reasons, however during the workgroup meeting there was quite some opposition.
    • One of the reasons is that they wanted to use a KOS objects that summarizes the most important objects of the Study. These could then be retrieved directly.
    • Problem for this is that for all current history these KOS objects are not available, and also links will change due to security measures.
    • To get a clear view on the workflows and use cases the proposal is to create a whitepaper which can then be used for getting the required profile developments clear.
    • We want to support the creation of this whitepaper, it would also give clarity on some of the questions from the Plugathon team on Query and Access to Image data.
  • IRA feedback
    • IRA was tested by two teams: AGFA and RadAI
    • Overall it was not too difficult to get is working, it seems.
    • Several small possible improvements/extensions were mentioned. (don't have overview of them)
    • Tests are based on the FHIR R4, and the opinion was expressed that there may be a challenge for developers to move to R5 because of incompatibilities between the two versions.
    • Putting more extensions on R4 is probably not something that FHIR groups will entertain yet the field may be much in favor of using something stable than new and incompatible.
    • Obvious risk is that more extension elevate the risk of more proprietary solutions that may threaten interoperability. We need to look more into the known incompatibilities and decide what route the profiling of FHIR should take both in the IRA context and the IDR context or future reporting-related profiles.
    • No direct follow up required.


  • Directions for Coming year

As we have momentum for the below items, we need to follow up on these in the coming development cycle.

    • IDR development will continue under the Gemini flag - see proposal from Kevin.
    • Expectation is that this will take at least till end of the year, meaning TI is not expected before then
    • Plugathon team will come with at least one profile proposal, for this we want to use the momentum, and this means we should accept that for development. The team will be main editor.
    • MCWG has feedback on some profiles and available interfaces, discussions let to the insight that more clarification for the real workflows is required.
    • Proposal is to create a whitepaper to get the full overview of interfaces and way of working, this will be using also MCWG resources.
    • IRA feedback follow up?
Retrieved from "http://wiki.ihe.net/index.php?title=Rad_Tech_Minutes_2024-06-04-07&oldid=134053"