Difference between revisions of "ITI Planning Committee 2011/2012 Planning Cycle"

From IHE Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(10 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 441: Line 441:
 
|}
 
|}
  
−
= ITI Planning Committee 2012 Final Text Review =
+
= ITI Planning Committee 2012 Final Text Review - March 19 2012 =
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
== March 19 2012 ==
 
 
Joint ITI Planning/Technical Provisional Selection for Final Text
 
Joint ITI Planning/Technical Provisional Selection for Final Text
−
=== Agenda March 19 ===
+
== Agenda March 19 ==
 
# Profiles to [[Final Text Process| consider for Final Text]]
 
# Profiles to [[Final Text Process| consider for Final Text]]
 
## Cross-Community Fetch (XCF)
 
## Cross-Community Fetch (XCF)
Line 470: Line 467:
 
# white papers to consider for archival: None Proposed
 
# white papers to consider for archival: None Proposed
  
−
=== Minutes March 19 ===
+
== Minutes March 19 ==
 +
 
 +
=== Summary of decisions ===
 +
The following table is a summary of the detailed minutes which follow.
  
−
==== Summary of decisions ====
 
 
{| style="width:95%" border="1" cellpadding="1"
 
{| style="width:95%" border="1" cellpadding="1"
 
! TI Supplements
 
! TI Supplements
−
! FT or Remains TI
+
! FT/Remains TI/Deprecate
−
! Condition
+
! Explanation/Conditions
 
! Owner
 
! Owner
−
! Final Decision - June 29, 2011
+
! Final Decision - June 18, 2012
 +
|-  style="background:white; color:black"
 +
| XCF
 +
| TI
 +
| No Testing
 +
|
 +
|
 
|-  style="background:white; color:black"
 
|-  style="background:white; color:black"
 
| XCPD
 
| XCPD
 
| TI
 
| TI
−
|  
+
| Patient Locator option not tested and may need revision, consider next year.
 
|  
 
|  
 
|
 
|
 
|-  style="background:white; color:black"
 
|-  style="background:white; color:black"
−
| XUA++
+
| XDW
 
| TI
 
| TI
 +
| No NA Testing this year, consider next year
 
|  
 
|  
 
|
 
|
 +
|-  style="background:yellow; color:black"
 +
| XUA++
 +
| FT
 
|  
 
|  
 +
# completed CP passes ballot
 +
# EU testing is successful
 +
# Open Issues resolved
 +
| 1. Rob, 2. Lynn, 3. Rob
 +
| 1. CP 606 received minor editorial comment which is resolved.
 +
2. Two of the three options were successfully tested.  authorization consent was not tested, same option as subject of CP.  Discussion of potentially breaking apart the two options which are ready and keep the remaining option in TI until testing.
 +
 +
3. Open issues in the supplement: XUA++003 - has been resolved in CP 606, XUA++004 - not resolved and need feedback on these issues
 +
 +
Agreed to delay Final Text until the last option has been tested.  Expect that testing to happen next year.
 
|-  style="background:white; color:black"
 
|-  style="background:white; color:black"
 
| Delayed Doc Assem
 
| Delayed Doc Assem
 
| TI
 
| TI
−
|  
+
| Limited Testing
 
|
 
|
 
|  
 
|  
 +
|-  style="background:orange; color:black"
 +
| DRR
 +
| Deprecate
 +
| Need deprecation process
 +
| co-chairs
 +
| Agreed to do the following
 +
# Do not publish the DRR TI this coming year
 +
# ITI TF-2b 3.49 & 3.50 "This transaction has been retired in favor of the use of the XDW Profile"
 +
# ITI TF-1 Section 22 "This profile has been retired in favor of the use of the XDW Profile"
 +
# Use a "editorial" CP to document this change going in to the TF Final Text - CP # 644 assigned to Karen
 
|-  style="background:white; color:black"
 
|-  style="background:white; color:black"
−
| DRR
+
| DSG
 
| TI
 
| TI
−
|  
+
| CP to reformat, limited testing
 
|
 
|
 
|  
 
|  
 
|-  style="background:white; color:black"
 
|-  style="background:white; color:black"
−
| DSG
+
| DEN
 
| TI
 
| TI
 +
| No testing
 
|  
 
|  
 
|
 
|
−
|
 
 
|-  style="background:white; color:black"
 
|-  style="background:white; color:black"
 
| DSUB
 
| DSUB
 
| TI
 
| TI
−
|  
+
| Several open CPs, consider next year
 
|
 
|
 
|  
 
|  
Line 518: Line 547:
 
| HPD
 
| HPD
 
| TI
 
| TI
−
|  
+
| Open problems & extension not resolved
 
|
 
|
 
|  
 
|  
Line 525: Line 554:
 
| TI
 
| TI
 
|  
 
|  
−
|  
+
# Add use case to critical results white paper
 +
# Fix NAV to be more usable
 +
| 1. Rob, 2. John
 
|
 
|
 
|-  style="background:white; color:black"
 
|-  style="background:white; color:black"
 
| On-Demand Doc
 
| On-Demand Doc
 
| TI
 
| TI
−
|  
+
| Waiting for further deployments
 
|
 
|
 
|  
 
|  
−
 
 
|-  style="background:yellow; color:black"
 
|-  style="background:yellow; color:black"
 
| RFD
 
| RFD
 
| FT
 
| FT
 +
| Committment to develop testing tools within 2012-2013
 +
| Lynn
 +
| Lynn has a committment for completion this Fall.  Approved to go to Final Text.
 +
|-  style="background:white; color:black"
 +
| SVS
 +
| TI
 +
| More testing needed
 
|  
 
|  
−
# Complete two open CPs 485, 569 (Complete)
+
|
−
# Committment to develop testing tools within 2011-2012
 
−
| George - 1, Lynn - 2
 
−
| NOT approved for FT
 
−
 
 
−
( CP failed ballot - try again next year)
 
 
|-  style="background:white; color:black"
 
|-  style="background:white; color:black"
−
| SVS
+
| Metadata-Limited Doc Source
 
| TI
 
| TI
 +
| More testing needed
 
|  
 
|  
 +
|
 +
|-  style="background:white; color:black"
 +
| XAD-PID Change Management
 +
| TI
 +
| More testing needed
 
|  
 
|  
 
|
 
|
Line 553: Line 591:
 
| XDS Metadata Update
 
| XDS Metadata Update
 
| TI
 
| TI
−
|  
+
| Several open CPs
 
|
 
|
 
|  
 
|  
 
|}
 
|}
 +
 
=== Initial Review ===
 
=== Initial Review ===
 +
Initial pass of each current TI Supplement, doing a quick assessment of likelihood of moving to Final Text
 +
* Cross-Community Fetch (XCF)
 +
** No testing so far : 2 signed up for NA but no tests run, and EU one vendor only
 +
* Cross-Community Patient Discovery (XCPD)
 +
** Options not tested but consider for FT (see below)
 +
* Cross-Enterprise Document Workflow (XDW)
 +
** No testing in NA, lots of vendors signed up for EU. Defer.
 +
* Cross-Enterprise User Assertion - Attribute Extension (XUA++)
 +
** Major CP on one option about to ballot.  Could consider moving all but that troublesome option. Could advertise that CP to EU connectathon participation.  consider for FT (see below)
 +
* Delayed Document Assembly
 +
** Defer
 +
* Document-based Referral Request (DRR)
 +
** Mark Sinke states forcare only signup for DRR but has decided to use XDW instead
 +
** Discuss for deprecation.
 +
* Document Digital Signature (DSG)
 +
** Significant CP to reformat to conform as content profile
 +
** People are actually using it (Manuel Metz)
 +
** Registration but no testing
 +
** Defer
 +
* Document Encryption (DEN)
 +
** Small signups but no testing
 +
** Defer
 +
* Document Metadata Subscription (DSUB)
 +
** Good participation
 +
** Couple of CPs need to resolved, currently too many variations
 +
** Defer
 +
* Healthcare Provider Directory (HPD)
 +
** Several problems not resolved and proposed extension from US not resolved
 +
** Open problems not submitted in CP process
 +
** Karen will submit CPs
 +
** Defer
 +
* Notification of Document Availability (NAV)
 +
** Hung up on content profile profile problems
 +
** Far to complex of a solution for the problem
 +
** Ultimately will need to deprecate and start over
 +
** XML schema is too hard for the value you get out of it
 +
** Part of the mobile health come up with a solution that makes this one easier in the future
 +
** Add to critical results use cases
 +
** Consider for deprecation (see below)
 +
* On-Demand Documents
 +
** Consider, testing is going well with few problems found (see below)
 +
* Retrieve Form for Data Capture (RFD)
 +
** consider, problems from last year resolved (see below)
 +
* Sharing Value Sets (SVS)
 +
** Defer
 +
* Support for Metadata-Limited Document Sources
 +
** Defer
 +
* XAD-PID Change Management
 +
** Defer
 +
* XDS Metadata Update
 +
** Defer
 +
=== Detailed Review of selected profiles ===
 +
==== Cross-Community Patient Discovery (XCPD) ====
 +
* Are all significant CPs against the profile "closed"?
 +
** Yes
 +
* Are all significant CPs against the underlying standards "closed"?
 +
** Yes
 +
* Have all significant comments been CP'd or rejected?
 +
** Concern expressed that Patient Locator Service is not well understood and not implemented.
 +
* Have all open issues listed in the Supplement been closed?
 +
** No, X006 needs to be resolved before going final
 +
** X021 can be closed
 +
* Have all significant issues at Connectathon been dealt with?
 +
** Yes
 +
* Gather feedback from implementers via a formal questionnaire to Connectathon participants
 +
** Not available.  Consider for future years.  Connectathon Project Manager responsibility.
 +
* Has the Connectathon Project Manager been queried and significant issues addressed?
 +
** Yes
 +
* Has the profile been through a Connectathon in at least two regions?
 +
** Yes
 +
* Has the profile been successfully tested with all actors at least at one Connectathon?
 +
** Yes
 +
* Have different implementations of each actor in the profile been tested?
 +
** Yes
 +
* Have all the options been tested successfully at at least one Connectathon?
 +
** No
 +
* Are there IHE-provided software testing tools to address all aspects of the profile?
 +
** Yes but not all aspects, options are not supported by testing tools
 +
* Have the standards underlying the profile been implemented? In similar use cases? In healthcare? In general IT?
 +
** Yes
 +
* (Do you have concrete reason to believe that this works robustly in the Real World) / (Are any products available for purchase that implement the profile?)
 +
** Yes
 +
* Have all issues that may have been raised about the profile been resolved?
 +
** No - locator service still has concerns but is an option
 +
* Has there been sufficient interest in the profile to generate a one-page overview of the profile
 +
** Yes
 +
 +
'''MOTION''': proceed to final text under condition:
 +
* note in final text associated with that option stating will consider further work on health data locator and may need to retire or revise this option
 +
*Also need to resolve open issue X006
 +
'''VOTE''':
 +
* IN FAVOR: 2
 +
* ABSTAIN: 2
 +
* OPPOSED: 6
 +
 +
'''DECISION''': Leave in TI for one more year bacause of concern of option.
 +
 +
==== Cross-Enterprise User Assertion - Attribute Extension (XUA++) ====
 +
 +
* Are all significant CPs against the profile "closed"?
 +
** Two in the current ballot, conditional on CPs passing ballot
 +
* Are all significant CPs against the underlying standards "closed"?
 +
** Yes
 +
* Have all significant comments been CP'd or rejected?
 +
** Yes
 +
* Have all open issues listed in the Supplement been closed?
 +
** No but could find out if they are resolved
 +
* Have all significant issues at Connectathon been dealt with?
 +
** No but CP ballots expected to resolve them.
 +
* Gather feedback from implementers via a formal questionnaire to Connectathon participants
 +
** Not available.  Consider for future years.  Connectathon Project Manager responsibility.
 +
* Has the Connectathon Project Manager been queried and significant issues addressed?
 +
** Yes
 +
* Has the profile been through a Connectathon in at least two regions?
 +
** Yes
 +
* Has the profile been successfully tested with all actors at least at one Connectathon?
 +
** Yes
 +
* Have different implementations of each actor in the profile been tested?
 +
** Yes
 +
* Have all the options been tested successfully at at least one Connectathon?
 +
** All options have been sucessfully been tested
 +
* Are there IHE-provided software testing tools to address all aspects of the profile?
 +
** No XUA IHE provided testing tools
 +
* Have the standards underlying the profile been implemented? In similar use cases? In healthcare? In general IT?
 +
** Yes
 +
* (Do you have concrete reason to believe that this works robustly in the Real World) / (Are any products available for purchase that implement the profile?)
 +
** Yes, Yes
 +
* Have all issues that may have been raised about the profile been resolved?
 +
** Ues
 +
* Has there been sufficient interest in the profile to generate a one-page overview of the profile
 +
** Not a profile, an option on an existing profile
 +
 +
'''MOTION''': proceed to final text under condition:
 +
* CPs pass ballot
 +
* EU testing successful
 +
* open issues resolved
 +
 +
'''VOTE''':
 +
* ABSTAIN: 2
 +
* OPPOSED: 0
 +
 +
'''DECISION''': Move to FT.
 +
 +
==== On-Demand Documents ====
 +
* Are all significant CPs against the profile "closed"?
 +
** No - extra data on the retrieve CP
 +
* Are all significant CPs against the underlying standards "closed"?
 +
** Yes
 +
* Have all significant comments been CP'd or rejected?
 +
** Yes
 +
* Have all open issues listed in the Supplement been closed?
 +
** CP 529 needs to be resolved.  other open issue completed
 +
* Have all significant issues at Connectathon been dealt with?
 +
** Yes
 +
* Gather feedback from implementers via a formal questionnaire to Connectathon participants
 +
** Not available.  Consider for future years.  Connectathon Project Manager responsibility.
 +
* Has the Connectathon Project Manager been queried and significant issues addressed?
 +
** Yes
 +
* Has the profile been through a Connectathon in at least two regions?
 +
** Yes
 +
* Has the profile been successfully tested with all actors at least at one Connectathon?
 +
** Yes
 +
* Have different implementations of each actor in the profile been tested?
 +
** Yes
 +
* Have all the options been tested successfully at at least one Connectathon?
 +
** No - persistence
 +
* Are there IHE-provided software testing tools to address all aspects of the profile?
 +
** None.  Expected some day.
 +
* Have the standards underlying the profile been implemented? In similar use cases? In healthcare? In general IT?
 +
** Yes
 +
* (Do you have concrete reason to believe that this works robustly in the Real World) / (Are any products available for purchase that implement the profile?)
 +
** Concerns here, US has adopted this but not deployed yet.
 +
* Have all issues that may have been raised about the profile been resolved?
 +
** Yes
 +
* Has there been sufficient interest in the profile to generate a one-page overview of the profile
 +
** Not a profile, an option on an existing profile
 +
 +
'''MOTION''': Defer consideration for Final Text                                     
 +
 +
'''VOTE''': All in favor
 +
 +
'''DECISION''': Delay FT.
 +
 +
==== Retrieve Form for Data Capture (RFD) ====
 +
 +
Updates from review of criteria from last year:
 +
* CP has been resolved
 +
* Test tools did not get developed but it is in plan for Summer 2012
 +
* Open Issues - George has reviewed and none are concerning and have been resolved or do not need resolution
 +
 +
Motion: approve conditional on test tool plans acceptable
 +
Opposed: None
 +
Abstentions: None
 +
Passed
 +
test plans - Lynn
 +
 +
'''MOTION''': proceed to final text under condition:
 +
* test tool plan
 +
 +
'''VOTE''': All in favor
 +
 +
'''DECISION''': Move to FT.
 +
 +
==== Document-based referral (DRR) ====
 +
XDW has much more adoption than DRR ever generated and accomplishes the requirement.
 +
 +
 +
'''MOTION''': Deprecate this Profile
 +
 +
'''VOTE''': All in Favor
 +
* ABSTAIN: 2
 +
* OPPOSED: 0
 +
 +
'''DECISION''': Deprecate this profile.  Co-chairs to identify process.
 +
 +
==== Notification of Document Availability (NAV) ====
 +
Comments from the group:
 +
* Prefer to fix rather than deprecate.
 +
* Has serious problems but premature to deprecate it.  Need to rework use cases and then decide how to act.
 +
Motion: keep at TI encourage contributors to propose CPs to fix it.
 +
 +
closely related use cases coming out the critical results work - Rob will add to use cases in this white paper
 +
Could be a CP or new work item
 +
 +
Passed
 +
 +
Charles volunteers John to fix NAV
 +
'''MOTION''': Keep at TI and encourage contributors to propose fixes
 +
 +
'''VOTE''': All in Favor
 +
 +
'''DECISION''': Keet at TI request Rob to add use case to Critical Results white paper and John  to propose a way to fix the problems in the profile.
 +
 +
=== Review profiles in Final Text ===
 +
None seemed appropriate for deprecation
 +
 +
=== Review white papers ===
 +
None seemed appropriate for deprecation
 +
 +
=== Final Decision Plan ===
 +
During May f2f meeting schedule a tcon in June to make final decision.  (wait for EU connectathon results to make final decisions).
 +
 +
= ITI Planning Committee 2012 Final Text Review - June 18 2012 =
 +
Joint ITI Planning/Technical Final Selection for Final Text
 +
 +
== Reviewed preliminary conditions ==
 +
Notes in table within [[ITI_Planning_Committee_2011/2012_Planning_Cycle#Summary_of_decisions | Summary of Decisions]].
 +
 +
== Assignment of editors ==
 +
TI supplements (HPD, XCPD, XDW, DSUB, XUA++) due to Mary on 8/13.  Due to committee 7/30.
 +
 +
TF Vol & RFD due to Mary 8/6.  Due to committee 7/25.
 +
 +
* HPD - Karen,  Lynn review
 +
* XCPD - Karen, Lynn review
 +
* XDW - Mauro,  Lynn review
 +
* DSUB - Rob, Moehrke review
 +
* XUA++ - John (via Derrick), Lynn review
 +
* RFD - George (via Derrick), Rob review
 +
* Vol. 1 - Derrick, Moehrke review
 +
* Vol. 2a - Jim, Derrick review
 +
* Vol. 2b - Rob, Lynn review
 +
* Vol. 2x - Jim, Derrick review
 +
* Vol. 3 - Jim, Rob review

Latest revision as of 15:26, 19 July 2012

Introduction

This WIKI page documents 2011/2012 Planning Cycle for the ITI Planning Domain, including the face-to-face meeting in October 2011 and the webinars that will lead up to that meeting.

Important Dates

Date Event Comments Coordinates
6-Sep-11

11:59pm CDT

Call for Proposals CLOSE Submitted proposals can be found here.
22-Sep-11 Webinar #1 - 9:00am-11:00 CDT Agenda
Join Webex (password "meeting")
1-866-469-3239
(924 969 535#)
28-Sep-11 Webinar #2 - 9:00am-11:00 CDT CANCELLED
29-Sep-11 Webinar #3 - 10:00am-12:00 CDT CANCELLED
11-Oct-11

12-Oct-11

ITI Planning Committee f2f See Below Meeting Address:
RSNA Headquarters
Oak Brook, IL

Webinar Organization

Each webinar will be organized as follows (this will vary slightly depending upon how many proposals we will be reviewing:

  • The two hour time allocation will be divided into 20-minute time-slots, with the remaining time for introductory remarks and follow-up discussion.
  • Each 20-minute timeslot will be allocated to a profile/white paper proposal… the first 10 minutes will be taken up by a presentation by the proposal author, with the remaining 10 minutes reserved for discussion and any disposition (if required).
  • Each 10-minute presentation will be comprised of a maximum of 5 Powerpoint slides, presenting the proposal concisely and completely. We have taken the liberty of supplying a presentation template that you may choose to use, and this can be found on the IHE ftp site here.

Webinar #1 AGENDA/Notes

Date Time Coordinates Recording of the meeting
22-Sep-11 9:00-11:00 CDT Join Webex(password "meeting")
1-866-469-3239
( 924 969 535#)
 Meeting recording
# Proposal Author/Presenter Description Time Comments
Karen Witting, Claudio Saccavini : co-Chairs Webinar Introduction, process 9:00-9:10
ITI 1.0 wiki Link Horn, Rob Critical & Important Results 9:10-9:30 2 year work effort due to need for close coordination among many domains
ITI 2.0 FTP Link Yutaka ANDO Patient Encounter Tracking Query (PEQ) 9:30-9:50

Presentation

List of clarification questions submitted to proposal submitter
ITI 3.0 FTP Link Geoff Pascoe, Rob Horn, PCD Configuration Management for Small Devices 9:50-10:10
2 year work effort, starting with white paper
Recommend adding a diagram to show flow of information
Joint work with PCD but applies to medical devices from other domains like Radiology
ITI 4.0 FTP Link Bill Majurski, Geoff Pascoe, Rob Horn XD* Documentation 10:10-10:30 No significant discussion, work item well understood from prior years efforts
ITI 5.0 FTP Link Keith Boone XDS for Mobile Health 10:30-10:45

Presentation

Clarification of environment for submission of proposal and purpose of proposal. Updated diagram showing Registry/Repository Proxy.
Karen Witting, Claudio Saccavini : co-Chairs Discussion, Next Steps 10:45-11:00 Agreed to cancel Webinars, next discussion at f2f

ITI Planning Committee f2f - 11-12Oct11 AGENDA

The following agenda also includes the minutes from the meeting

TUESDAY October 11 - DAY 1

Location Webex/Tcon
RSNA Headquarters
Oak Brook, IL
 himss.webex.com
Agenda # Time/Description Minutes/Notes
1. Welcome 9:00 am - 9:30 CT
  • Introductions
  • Housekeeping
  • Domain Sponsor Announcements
  • Procedures, voting privileges, etc.
  • Agenda review
2. ITI Capacity 9:30 - 10:00 CT
  • Capacity of ITI for new profile/white paper proposals (decision)
 Current and ongoing work items identified
  • Completion of the De-Identification cookbook – This is instructions to other IHE domains on how to create profiles that use anonymization and pseudonymization tools
  • Create a Cross-Enterprise Workflow (XDW) training package and assist other domains with the creation of their specific workflow that uses this infrastructure profile.
  • And the normal documentation maintenance including change proposals, wiki, and profile lifecycle management

Agreed that capacity for additional 3-4 work items of mixed size is expected

3. Process and evaluation criteria 10:00 - 10:30 CT
  • Evaluation Criteria
  • Process used to develop a prioritized work item list
    • Ranking by Criteria
      • Prior year used balloting process and summarization through spreadsheet
    • Ranking by Ballot
      • Prior year used four ballots per organization for 6 proposals
  • Reviewed prior year criteria and agreed to use without significant change (minor editorial changes applied)
  • Agreed to rank by criteria through discussion of values followed by a balloting process with three ballots per organization
4. Advocacy - authors & representatives make a case for each proposal 10:30 - 12:00 CT
(Please ensure you have attended/viewed the Webinar prior to this session)
  • ITI 4.0 XD* Documentation
  • ITI 5.0 XDS for Mobile Health
  • ITI 4.0 XD* Documentation (no presentation)
    • move common material currently in profile specific areas into common area, e.g. stored query catelog
    • add content for underdocumented areas, e.g. rules on the construction of submissions
    • improve inadequate documentation, e.g. Appendix V
    • add topics on ebRS & ebRIM that needed explanation - re-documented from an XD* point of view
  • ITI 5.0 XDS for Mobile Health
    • Presentation
    • Use case focus on patient of concern, questions on authorization, added to the list of standards to apply
    • Concern that this looks like profiling of XML and that questions whether IHE should be doing that
    • Concern with requirement to "make it simplier" and what is the scope of that
LUNCH 12:00 - 1:00 CT
5. Advocacy (continued) 1:00 - 2:30 CT
(Please ensure you have attended/viewed the Webinar prior to this session)
  • ITI 1.0 Critical & Important Results
  • ITI 3.0 Configuration Management for Small Devices
  • ITI 1.0 Critical & Important Results
    • Presentation
    • Agreed that is WP where some parts may be more technically detailed than others
  • ITI 3.0 Configuration Management for Small Devices
6. General Discussion and preparation for evaluation 2:30 - 3:30 CT
  • Continued discussion for work items not fully understood
  • Re-review of Evaluation Criteria
  • Conclude Process used to develop a prioritized work item list
 Filled out criteria spreadsheet for work items previously discussed
7. Break 3:30 - 4:00 CT
8. Advocacy (continued) 4:00 - 4:45 CT
(Please ensure you have attended/viewed the Webinar prior to this session)
  • ITI 2.0 Patient Encounter Tracking Query (PEQ)
9. General Discussion and preparation for evaluation 4:45 - 5:15 CT Completed criteria spreadsheet which includes the results of Criteria Based Ranking, which are:
  • 1. XD* Documentation
  • 2&3 (tie). Critical & Important Results and XDS for Mobile Health
  • 4. Patient Encounter Tracking Query (PEQ)
  • 5. Configuration Management for Small Devices
ADJOURN 5:15 pm CT


WEDNESDAY October 12 - DAY 2

Location Webex/Tcon
RSNA Headquarters
Oak Brook, IL
 himss.webex.com
Agenda # Time/Description Minutes/Notes
1. Welcome, review of the day's plan 9:00 am - 9:15 am CT
2. Discussion and decision on prioritized work item list 9:15-10:00 am CT
  • Review results of the Ranking by Criteria
  • Ranking by Ballot
  • Decision of prioritized list of proposals
 Ballot Voting: Final Result
  • First ballot results:
    • 1. XD* Documentation
    • 2&3 (tie). Critical & Important Results and XDS for Mobile Health
    • 4&5 (tie). Patient Encounter Tracking Query (PEQ) and Configuration Management for Small Devices
  • Due to significant tied results, held run-off vote for each
    • 2&3 vote found clear winner for Critical & Important Results
    • 4&5 vote found still very close between these two but slight edge to Patient Encounter Tracking Query (PEQ)
  • Final ballot results:
    • 1. XD* Documentation
    • 2. Critical & Important Results
    • 3. XDS for Mobile Health
    • 4. Patient Encounter Tracking Query (PEQ)
    • 5. Configuration Management for Small Devices
3. Next Steps 10:00 - 10:30 am CT
  • Assignment of authors, due-dates, etc. for completion of Detailed Proposal (due date TBA) for turn-over to TC in November
  • All five proposals will be delivered to the ITI Technical Committee for further analysis
  • Detailed Proposals are Due: Nov. 7
  • Joint Plan/Tech tcon Nov. 16 1pm-2pm central time for final decision
4. Marketing and publicity planning 10:30 - 12:00 am CT
  • Assess status and impact
  • Plan work items for coming year
  • Assess status and work to be done
  • Preparation for meeting at HIMSS
  • Discussion of EU meetings like Wohit
  • Assess other opportunities for communicating about ITI work
  • Assess status and impact
  • XDW educational slides - Claudio and team will develop
  • Security & Privacy charts need DEN added - John assigned to do this
  • XDR/XDM charts need reference to metadata-limited and encrypted email enhancements - did encryption enhancement in the meeting, Karen to update for metadata-limited and supply to Chris for webinar scheduled for next week.
  • Requested that HIMSS promote the webinar on XDR/XDM scheduled for next week
  • Patient & Provider charts still not complete and now need XPID content integrated.
  • XPID missing - Karen will followup with Jose
  • XDW missing - Claudio's team will work on this
  • General review of wiki profile descriptions: Geoff, Rob and John will distribute amongst themselves for review. Chris will review security related profile descriptions.
  • Preparation for meeting at HIMSS
    • Agreed not to hold an ITI Planning educational meeting. Expect to have a presentation slot that Karen will present for the domain. Hope to have an IHE specific booth and will contribute experts from the domain as needed.
  • Discussion of EU meetings like Wohit
    • Domain is focused on the correct set of content to enable this and other meetings
LUNCH 12:00 - 1:00 CT
4. HIE White Paper 1:00-2:30 pm CT
  • Review status and plan next steps
  • IT Infrastructure HIMSS Virtual Conference charts
  • Reviewed current version and agreed on new title "Enabling Document Sharing through IHE" and agreed on adding a principles section along with content.
  • Reviewed beginning of Virtual HIMSS Converence charts
5. Strategic planning and liason activities 2:30-3:00 pm CT
  • IT Infrastructure Strategy/Categories
  • Review and assess
  • Input to Strategic Planning due Nov. 21 (see email from 10/4)
  • ITI Outreach and liason activity
  • Assess status and planning
  • IT Infrastructure Strategy/Categories
  • Categories remain the same, will be updated for 2011 profiles
  • Added table on strengths and weaknesses of the domain
  • Agreed this page represents the domains choice for input to Strategic Planning due Nov. 21 (see email from 10/4)
  • ITI Outreach and liason activity
  • Agreed to a less formal approach to this. Keep table of names which participate in ITI and another development domain. Removed deployment domain table. Regular domain reports replaces some of the need for this.
6. Wrap-up 3:00 - 3:30 pm CT
  • Schedule followup tcons
  • Assess Trial Implementation profiles movement to Final Text
  • Educational presentations and webinars
  • HIE White Paper
  • Other
  • Schedule followup tcons
  • Assess Trial Implementation profiles movement to Final Text
  • Schedule this during the ITI Technical Cmt meeting
  • Educational presentations and webinars
  • Patient&Provider -10/17 9-10 central
  • XDW educ - 11/7 9 central - 10:30 central
  • Security & Privacy updates - email review only
  • HIE White Paper
  • 11/10 12:30 central 1.5 hours 12/15 12:30 central 1.5 hours
ADJOURN 3:30 pm CT

ITI Planning Committee 2012 Final Text Review - March 19 2012

Joint ITI Planning/Technical Provisional Selection for Final Text

Agenda March 19

  1. Profiles to consider for Final Text
    1. Cross-Community Fetch (XCF)
    2. Cross-Community Patient Discovery (XCPD)
    3. Cross-Enterprise Document Workflow (XDW)
    4. Cross-Enterprise User Assertion - Attribute Extension (XUA++)
    5. Delayed Document Assembly
    6. Document-based Referral Request (DRR)
    7. Document Digital Signature (DSG)
    8. Document Encryption (DEN)
    9. Document Metadata Subscription (DSUB)
    10. Healthcare Provider Directory (HPD)
    11. Notification of Document Availability (NAV)
    12. On-Demand Documents
    13. Retrieve Form for Data Capture (RFD)
    14. Sharing Value Sets (SVS)
    15. Support for Metadata-Limited Document Sources
    16. XAD-PID Change Management
    17. XDS Metadata Update
  2. Input for TI Supplement Analysis: Connectathon participation & test tool notes
  3. profiles to consider for deprecation :
    1. Document-based referral (DRR) - replaced by XDW
  4. white papers to consider for archival: None Proposed

Minutes March 19

Summary of decisions

The following table is a summary of the detailed minutes which follow.

TI Supplements FT/Remains TI/Deprecate Explanation/Conditions Owner Final Decision - June 18, 2012
XCF TI No Testing
XCPD TI Patient Locator option not tested and may need revision, consider next year.
XDW TI No NA Testing this year, consider next year
XUA++ FT
  1. completed CP passes ballot
  2. EU testing is successful
  3. Open Issues resolved
 1. Rob, 2. Lynn, 3. Rob 1. CP 606 received minor editorial comment which is resolved.

2. Two of the three options were successfully tested. authorization consent was not tested, same option as subject of CP. Discussion of potentially breaking apart the two options which are ready and keep the remaining option in TI until testing.

3. Open issues in the supplement: XUA++003 - has been resolved in CP 606, XUA++004 - not resolved and need feedback on these issues

Agreed to delay Final Text until the last option has been tested. Expect that testing to happen next year.

Delayed Doc Assem TI Limited Testing
DRR Deprecate Need deprecation process co-chairs Agreed to do the following
  1. Do not publish the DRR TI this coming year
  2. ITI TF-2b 3.49 & 3.50 "This transaction has been retired in favor of the use of the XDW Profile"
  3. ITI TF-1 Section 22 "This profile has been retired in favor of the use of the XDW Profile"
  4. Use a "editorial" CP to document this change going in to the TF Final Text - CP # 644 assigned to Karen
DSG TI CP to reformat, limited testing
DEN TI No testing
DSUB TI Several open CPs, consider next year
HPD TI Open problems & extension not resolved
NAV TI
  1. Add use case to critical results white paper
  2. Fix NAV to be more usable
 1. Rob, 2. John
On-Demand Doc TI Waiting for further deployments
RFD FT Committment to develop testing tools within 2012-2013 Lynn Lynn has a committment for completion this Fall. Approved to go to Final Text.
SVS TI More testing needed
Metadata-Limited Doc Source TI More testing needed
XAD-PID Change Management TI More testing needed
XDS Metadata Update TI Several open CPs

Initial Review

Initial pass of each current TI Supplement, doing a quick assessment of likelihood of moving to Final Text

  • Cross-Community Fetch (XCF)
    • No testing so far : 2 signed up for NA but no tests run, and EU one vendor only
  • Cross-Community Patient Discovery (XCPD)
    • Options not tested but consider for FT (see below)
  • Cross-Enterprise Document Workflow (XDW)
    • No testing in NA, lots of vendors signed up for EU. Defer.
  • Cross-Enterprise User Assertion - Attribute Extension (XUA++)
    • Major CP on one option about to ballot. Could consider moving all but that troublesome option. Could advertise that CP to EU connectathon participation. consider for FT (see below)
  • Delayed Document Assembly
    • Defer
  • Document-based Referral Request (DRR)
    • Mark Sinke states forcare only signup for DRR but has decided to use XDW instead
    • Discuss for deprecation.
  • Document Digital Signature (DSG)
    • Significant CP to reformat to conform as content profile
    • People are actually using it (Manuel Metz)
    • Registration but no testing
    • Defer
  • Document Encryption (DEN)
    • Small signups but no testing
    • Defer
  • Document Metadata Subscription (DSUB)
    • Good participation
    • Couple of CPs need to resolved, currently too many variations
    • Defer
  • Healthcare Provider Directory (HPD)
    • Several problems not resolved and proposed extension from US not resolved
    • Open problems not submitted in CP process
    • Karen will submit CPs
    • Defer
  • Notification of Document Availability (NAV)
    • Hung up on content profile profile problems
    • Far to complex of a solution for the problem
    • Ultimately will need to deprecate and start over
    • XML schema is too hard for the value you get out of it
    • Part of the mobile health come up with a solution that makes this one easier in the future
    • Add to critical results use cases
    • Consider for deprecation (see below)
  • On-Demand Documents
    • Consider, testing is going well with few problems found (see below)
  • Retrieve Form for Data Capture (RFD)
    • consider, problems from last year resolved (see below)
  • Sharing Value Sets (SVS)
    • Defer
  • Support for Metadata-Limited Document Sources
    • Defer
  • XAD-PID Change Management
    • Defer
  • XDS Metadata Update
    • Defer

Detailed Review of selected profiles

Cross-Community Patient Discovery (XCPD)

  • Are all significant CPs against the profile "closed"?
    • Yes
  • Are all significant CPs against the underlying standards "closed"?
    • Yes
  • Have all significant comments been CP'd or rejected?
    • Concern expressed that Patient Locator Service is not well understood and not implemented.
  • Have all open issues listed in the Supplement been closed?
    • No, X006 needs to be resolved before going final
    • X021 can be closed
  • Have all significant issues at Connectathon been dealt with?
    • Yes
  • Gather feedback from implementers via a formal questionnaire to Connectathon participants
    • Not available. Consider for future years. Connectathon Project Manager responsibility.
  • Has the Connectathon Project Manager been queried and significant issues addressed?
    • Yes
  • Has the profile been through a Connectathon in at least two regions?
    • Yes
  • Has the profile been successfully tested with all actors at least at one Connectathon?
    • Yes
  • Have different implementations of each actor in the profile been tested?
    • Yes
  • Have all the options been tested successfully at at least one Connectathon?
    • No
  • Are there IHE-provided software testing tools to address all aspects of the profile?
    • Yes but not all aspects, options are not supported by testing tools
  • Have the standards underlying the profile been implemented? In similar use cases? In healthcare? In general IT?
    • Yes
  • (Do you have concrete reason to believe that this works robustly in the Real World) / (Are any products available for purchase that implement the profile?)
    • Yes
  • Have all issues that may have been raised about the profile been resolved?
    • No - locator service still has concerns but is an option
  • Has there been sufficient interest in the profile to generate a one-page overview of the profile
    • Yes

MOTION: proceed to final text under condition:

  • note in final text associated with that option stating will consider further work on health data locator and may need to retire or revise this option
  • Also need to resolve open issue X006

VOTE:

  • IN FAVOR: 2
  • ABSTAIN: 2
  • OPPOSED: 6

DECISION: Leave in TI for one more year bacause of concern of option.

Cross-Enterprise User Assertion - Attribute Extension (XUA++)

  • Are all significant CPs against the profile "closed"?
    • Two in the current ballot, conditional on CPs passing ballot
  • Are all significant CPs against the underlying standards "closed"?
    • Yes
  • Have all significant comments been CP'd or rejected?
    • Yes
  • Have all open issues listed in the Supplement been closed?
    • No but could find out if they are resolved
  • Have all significant issues at Connectathon been dealt with?
    • No but CP ballots expected to resolve them.
  • Gather feedback from implementers via a formal questionnaire to Connectathon participants
    • Not available. Consider for future years. Connectathon Project Manager responsibility.
  • Has the Connectathon Project Manager been queried and significant issues addressed?
    • Yes
  • Has the profile been through a Connectathon in at least two regions?
    • Yes
  • Has the profile been successfully tested with all actors at least at one Connectathon?
    • Yes
  • Have different implementations of each actor in the profile been tested?
    • Yes
  • Have all the options been tested successfully at at least one Connectathon?
    • All options have been sucessfully been tested
  • Are there IHE-provided software testing tools to address all aspects of the profile?
    • No XUA IHE provided testing tools
  • Have the standards underlying the profile been implemented? In similar use cases? In healthcare? In general IT?
    • Yes
  • (Do you have concrete reason to believe that this works robustly in the Real World) / (Are any products available for purchase that implement the profile?)
    • Yes, Yes
  • Have all issues that may have been raised about the profile been resolved?
    • Ues
  • Has there been sufficient interest in the profile to generate a one-page overview of the profile
    • Not a profile, an option on an existing profile

MOTION: proceed to final text under condition:

  • CPs pass ballot
  • EU testing successful
  • open issues resolved

VOTE:

  • ABSTAIN: 2
  • OPPOSED: 0

DECISION: Move to FT.

On-Demand Documents

  • Are all significant CPs against the profile "closed"?
    • No - extra data on the retrieve CP
  • Are all significant CPs against the underlying standards "closed"?
    • Yes
  • Have all significant comments been CP'd or rejected?
    • Yes
  • Have all open issues listed in the Supplement been closed?
    • CP 529 needs to be resolved. other open issue completed
  • Have all significant issues at Connectathon been dealt with?
    • Yes
  • Gather feedback from implementers via a formal questionnaire to Connectathon participants
    • Not available. Consider for future years. Connectathon Project Manager responsibility.
  • Has the Connectathon Project Manager been queried and significant issues addressed?
    • Yes
  • Has the profile been through a Connectathon in at least two regions?
    • Yes
  • Has the profile been successfully tested with all actors at least at one Connectathon?
    • Yes
  • Have different implementations of each actor in the profile been tested?
    • Yes
  • Have all the options been tested successfully at at least one Connectathon?
    • No - persistence
  • Are there IHE-provided software testing tools to address all aspects of the profile?
    • None. Expected some day.
  • Have the standards underlying the profile been implemented? In similar use cases? In healthcare? In general IT?
    • Yes
  • (Do you have concrete reason to believe that this works robustly in the Real World) / (Are any products available for purchase that implement the profile?)
    • Concerns here, US has adopted this but not deployed yet.
  • Have all issues that may have been raised about the profile been resolved?
    • Yes
  • Has there been sufficient interest in the profile to generate a one-page overview of the profile
    • Not a profile, an option on an existing profile

MOTION: Defer consideration for Final Text

VOTE: All in favor

DECISION: Delay FT.

Retrieve Form for Data Capture (RFD)

Updates from review of criteria from last year:

  • CP has been resolved
  • Test tools did not get developed but it is in plan for Summer 2012
  • Open Issues - George has reviewed and none are concerning and have been resolved or do not need resolution

Motion: approve conditional on test tool plans acceptable Opposed: None Abstentions: None Passed test plans - Lynn

MOTION: proceed to final text under condition:

  • test tool plan

VOTE: All in favor

DECISION: Move to FT.

Document-based referral (DRR)

XDW has much more adoption than DRR ever generated and accomplishes the requirement.


MOTION: Deprecate this Profile

VOTE: All in Favor

  • ABSTAIN: 2
  • OPPOSED: 0

DECISION: Deprecate this profile. Co-chairs to identify process.

Notification of Document Availability (NAV)

Comments from the group:

  • Prefer to fix rather than deprecate.
  • Has serious problems but premature to deprecate it. Need to rework use cases and then decide how to act.

Motion: keep at TI encourage contributors to propose CPs to fix it.

closely related use cases coming out the critical results work - Rob will add to use cases in this white paper Could be a CP or new work item

Passed

Charles volunteers John to fix NAV MOTION: Keep at TI and encourage contributors to propose fixes

VOTE: All in Favor

DECISION: Keet at TI request Rob to add use case to Critical Results white paper and John to propose a way to fix the problems in the profile.

Review profiles in Final Text

None seemed appropriate for deprecation

Review white papers

None seemed appropriate for deprecation

Final Decision Plan

During May f2f meeting schedule a tcon in June to make final decision. (wait for EU connectathon results to make final decisions).

ITI Planning Committee 2012 Final Text Review - June 18 2012

Joint ITI Planning/Technical Final Selection for Final Text

Reviewed preliminary conditions

Notes in table within Summary of Decisions.

Assignment of editors

TI supplements (HPD, XCPD, XDW, DSUB, XUA++) due to Mary on 8/13. Due to committee 7/30.

TF Vol & RFD due to Mary 8/6. Due to committee 7/25.

  • HPD - Karen, Lynn review
  • XCPD - Karen, Lynn review
  • XDW - Mauro, Lynn review
  • DSUB - Rob, Moehrke review
  • XUA++ - John (via Derrick), Lynn review
  • RFD - George (via Derrick), Rob review
  • Vol. 1 - Derrick, Moehrke review
  • Vol. 2a - Jim, Derrick review
  • Vol. 2b - Rob, Lynn review
  • Vol. 2x - Jim, Derrick review
  • Vol. 3 - Jim, Rob review
Retrieved from "http://wiki.ihe.net/index.php?title=ITI_Planning_Committee_2011/2012_Planning_Cycle&oldid=61724"