PCCTech Minutes 2011 02 08: Difference between revisions
New page: On site Attendees: Laura Bright, Laura Heermann, Audrey Dickerson, Anne Diamond, Thom Kuhn, Lisa Spellman, Mike McCoy, Keith Boone, John Donnelly, Charles Rica, Call in Attendees: Tone... |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
4. Section naming inconsistencies across all PCC and QRPH documents need to be resolved. We have a list of the sections where one OID is being called by several different names. These need to be resolved to a single name for the section. | 4. Section naming inconsistencies across all PCC and QRPH documents need to be resolved. We have a list of the sections where one OID is being called by several different names. These need to be resolved to a single name for the section. | ||
5. QRPH needs more expertise from PCC to facilitate knowledge transfer on how to specify/code Entries and structured Entries, observations, etc. inside of Sections. | 5. QRPH needs more expertise from PCC to facilitate knowledge transfer on how to specify/code Entries and structured Entries, observations, etc. inside of Sections. | ||
Interfacility Transfer | |||
Revision as of 09:16, 8 February 2011
On site Attendees: Laura Bright, Laura Heermann, Audrey Dickerson, Anne Diamond, Thom Kuhn, Lisa Spellman, Mike McCoy, Keith Boone, John Donnelly, Charles Rica,
Call in Attendees: Tone Southerland,
Joint with QRPH
- MCH record
- Discussion re: oownership of record (mother vs. baby(ies)
- Discussion re: document/message that baby has been born. Information is in the NDS - but that is too late for the QRPH needs. LDS has the information, but if it is the mother's record may not trigger the birth of the child.
- Issue could be that we don't have sufficient CDR modeling resources in PCC.
- Next steps = Kieth and Lisa will work towards clarifying.
- List from Mary and Lisa reviewed and discussed:
1. Need XML example of how to represent additional participants in the CDA header (besides the Record Target) and how to represent the sections in the Structured Body so that sections can be associated with particular participants. LDS and MCH are examples of Content Documents that need to have this capability. (Note: the Newborn Delivery Section of LDS is not represented currently due to this issue. This section is needed to be consumed by the Content Creator Actor in EHDI to make the Early Hearing Care Plan.) [Nitin from Oz Systems may have a working example. It needs to be confirmed by PCC CDA experts.] 2. Need XML examples of how to represent Sections that consist of other sections. 3. Need clarity for Coded versus Non-coded Sections, ie Coded Vital Signs vs. Vital Signs a. Need clarity around the specifications for Parent Templates for Sections (Requirements need to be documented in the specification not just shown in the Example XML code fragment.) b. Need to have specs cleaned up so that there are not mismatches where section name and Template ID contradict each other. These errors require profile authors to resolve because you can’t tell which is right, the section name or the section OID. 4. Section naming inconsistencies across all PCC and QRPH documents need to be resolved. We have a list of the sections where one OID is being called by several different names. These need to be resolved to a single name for the section. 5. QRPH needs more expertise from PCC to facilitate knowledge transfer on how to specify/code Entries and structured Entries, observations, etc. inside of Sections.
Interfacility Transfer