Difference between revisions of "DICOM Profiles Whitepaper - Detailed Proposal"

Revision as of 12:29, 24 September 2009

1. Proposed Workitem: DICOM Profiles Whitepaper

Proposal Editor: Kevin O'Donnell (Toshiba)
Editor: <Name of candidate Lead Editor for the Profile, if known>
Domain: Radiology, Cardiology

Summary

A couple of the existing and proposed Radiology Profiles boil down to properly creating and displaying objects from a single Storage SOP Class. i.e. do one piece of DICOM correctly.

DICOM recently produced a sophisticated guide for creating 3D X-Ray objects.

IHE should figure out the details of how we could collaborate with DICOM on "simple profiles" like these. The idea has been floated in DICOM that they could develop these implementation guides for single SOP Classes, IHE could review them and they could be added to the list of profiles and tested at Connectathons.

This would allow DICOM to apply the in-depth expertise that went into specifying the object in the first place to documenting how it was intended to be used.

IHE would continue to do profiles that combine multiple services, spanning multiple standards, etc.

2. The Problem

3. Key Use Case

<Describe a short use case scenario from the user perspective. The use case should demonstrate the integration/workflow problem.>

4. Standards & Systems

DICOM Image SOP Classes (Especially the new ones, but also the poorly implemented ones)

5. Technical Approach

This would be a whitepaper outlining a process for managing and incorporating DICOM-developed profiles in IHE.

Breakdown of tasks that need to be accomplished

Discuss and resolving issues like:

do these profiles get added to the Radiology TF, the DICOM standard, or both
who is responsible for maintaining them
do they use the IHE Profile Template
who develops test plans & test tools for them
how do we splice the annual IHE cycle with the per-supplement DICOM process
how do we approve/coordinate such work items between IHE and DICOM

Document the consensus resolution in a whitepaper.

Plan a pilot project to develop such a profile according to the agreed method.

6. Support & Resources

DICOM WG-6 has briefly considered the idea but there is no formal commitment to it yet. Need to discuss.

DICOM WG-16 is the source of two of the work item proposals for profiles that would fit this mold, and was also the source of the previous such profiles.

Often the interest in such focussed profiles will be stronger in the modality-oriented DICOM working groups than in the broader IHE Radiology Committees.

7. Risks

<List technical or political risks that will need to be considered to successfully field the profile.>

8. Open Issues

<Point out any key issues or design problems. This will be helpful for estimating the amount of work and demonstrates thought has already gone into the candidate profile.>

9. Tech Cmte Evaluation

<The technical committee will use this area to record details of the effort estimation, etc.>

Effort Evaluation (as a % of Tech Cmte Bandwidth):

35% for ...

Responses to Issues:

See italics in Risk and Open Issue sections

Candidate Editor:

TBA

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 __NOTOC__
 ==1. Proposed Workitem: DICOM Profiles Whitepaper==
@@ Line 6: / Line 5: @@
 * Editor: ''<Name of candidate Lead Editor for the Profile, if known>''
 * Domain: Radiology, Cardiology
 ===Summary===
@@ Line 21: / Line 19: @@
 ==2. The Problem==
-''<Summarize the integration problem. What doesn’t work, or what needs to work.>''
@@ Line 33: / Line 31: @@
 ==4. Standards & Systems==
-''<List existing systems that are/could be involved in the problem/solution.>''
+DICOM Image SOP Classes (Especially the new ones, but also the poorly implemented ones)
-''<If known, list standards which might be relevant to the solution>''
 ==5. Technical Approach==
-''<This section can be very short but include as much detail as you like.  The Technical Committee will flesh it out when doing the effort estimation.>''
-''<Outline how the standards could be used/refined to solve the problems in the Use Cases.  The Technical Committee will be responsible for the full design and may choose to take a different approach, but a sample design is a good indication of feasibility.>''
+This would be a whitepaper outlining a process for managing and incorporating DICOM-developed profiles in IHE.
-''<If a phased approach would make sense indicate some logical phases.  This may be because standards are evolving, because the problem is too big to solve at once, or because there are unknowns that won’t be resolved soon.>''
+===Breakdown of tasks that need to be accomplished===
-===Existing actors===
+* Discuss and resolving issues like:
-''<Indicate what existing actors could be used or might be affected by the profile.>''
+:* do these profiles get added to the Radiology TF, the DICOM standard, or both
+:* who is responsible for maintaining them
+:* do they use the IHE Profile Template
+:* who develops test plans & test tools for them
+:* how do we splice the annual IHE cycle with the per-supplement DICOM process
+:* how do we approve/coordinate such work items between IHE and DICOM
-===New actors===
+* Document the consensus resolution in a whitepaper.
-''<List possible new actors>''
-===Existing transactions===
+* Plan a pilot project to develop such a profile according to the agreed method.
-''<Indicate how existing transactions might be used or might need to be extended.>''
-===New transactions (standards used)===
-''<Describe possible new transactions (indicating what standards would likely be used for each.  Transaction diagrams are very helpful here.  Feel free to go into as much detail as seems useful.>''
-===Impact on existing integration profiles===
+==6. Support & Resources==
-''<Indicate how existing profiles might need to be modified.>''
+DICOM WG-6 has briefly considered the idea but there is no formal commitment to it yet.  Need to discuss.
-===New integration profiles needed===
+DICOM WG-16 is the source of two of the work item proposals for profiles that would fit this mold, and was also the source of the previous such profiles.
-''<Indicate what new profile(s) might need to be created.>''
-===Breakdown of tasks that need to be accomplished===
+Often the interest in such focussed profiles will be stronger in the modality-oriented DICOM working groups than in the broader IHE Radiology Committees.
-''<A list of tasks would be helpful for the technical committee who will have to estimate the effort required to design, review and implement the profile.>''
-==6. Support & Resources==
-''<List groups that have expressed support for the proposal and resources that would be available to accomplish the tasks listed above.>''
 ==7. Risks==