PaLM Conf Minutes 2020-October-07

From IHE Wiki
Revision as of 13:16, 20 October 2020 by Salaver (Talk | contribs) (Created page with "==Attendees== {| class="wikitable" ! Name !! Email |- | Gunter Haroske || haroske@icloud.com |- | Mary Kennedy || mkenned@cap.org |- | Francois Macary || francois.macary@phast...")

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Attendees

Name Email
Gunter Haroske haroske@icloud.com
Mary Kennedy mkenned@cap.org
Francois Macary francois.macary@phast.fr
Rikki Merrick rikimerrick@gmail.com
Alessandro Sulis Allesandro.sulis@crs4.it
Megumi Kondo megumi.kondo.sakura.japan@gmail.com
Dan Rutz drutz@epic.com
Kevin Schap kschap@cap.org
David Beckman dbeckman@epic.com
Raj Dash r.dash@duke.edu
Francesca Vanzo fvanzo@consorzioarsenal.it
Jim Harrison james.harrison@virginia.edu
Ralf Herzog ralf.herzog@roche.com
JD Nolen jdlnolen@gmail.com
Francesca Frexia Francesca.frexia@crs4.it
Sujith Nair snair@acr.org
Sam Spencer sspence@cap.org
George Birdsong gbirdso@emory.edu
Ross Simpson ross.w.simpson@healthpartners.com
Alex Goel agoel@cap.org
Veronica Klepeis vklepeis@mgh.harvard.edu
Brian Bialecki bbialecki@acr.org
Markus Herrmann mdherrmann@mgh.hardvard.edu
Peter O’Toole peter.otoole@mtuitive.com
John Hargett jhargett@epic.com
David Clunie dclunie@dclunie.com
Peter Mello peter.mello@mtuitive.com
Craig Sayers

Next meeting: November 11, 2020

  • Agenda Review
  • New proposals
    • Timeframe?
      • Riki will send out the call for call for proposals – will give 1 month to submit and review on Nov and Dec calls
    • Evidence Creation profile for digital pathology
      • Looking for possible vendor support – who from the DICOM WG26 can we ask to help?
    • Radiology / Pathology Concordance Reporting Proposal
      • Proposal Link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/14-Xovvnbbh3_X-MYn3MidICYrBlcxlrP/view?usp=sharing
      • PPT Link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hXxETo7GCEpwAiZkiUJVKUQHYWAXB0Mj/view?usp=sharing
      • Discussion:
        • Key use case was described
        • Proposed profile is a new type of concordance workflow
        • Raj agrees with the generalizable paradigm
          • Surgery / biobanking reconciliation between research and clinical concordance is a good example
        • Problems raised are that different reports are produced in silos – not good access between different reports
          • Which data elements are fed to the concordance reporter?
            • Discussed the sharing of the concordance scores, not the data / reports per se
              • Example: specific images in radiology implies certain findings should be in a pathology report, but if that is not the case, there may have been something different going on (the pathology result should match what would be expected)
        • Where is the change in workflow that will be needed – how will that be addressed?
          • Mammography report:
            • Single number in radiology, but there is not that value in pathology – how do you get the scores to compare?
            • This may require recommendations from professional organizations/specialty society as best practice to adjust to a new workflow
            • This will take a long time and there will be pushback
        • Recommend focusing on the use cases where we do not need workflow changes
          • Biobanking
          • Maybe in APSR create a score section (later)
      • Best next step would be to identify use cases where we already have resonance with vendors
        • Need to have concrete examples to get vendor buy-in
          • Vendors needs to understand the value and what the gain is for their customers
      • IHE PaLM would like to have the support for APSR included in the profile
      • Proposed mechanisms:
        • FHIR
        • SDC format (captures the CAP’s electronic cancer data (eCC), but does not include anything else in a structured report) – there are some vendors implementing eCC SDC format)
          • IHE SDC working group is working on that
            • Using observation
            • Storing the SDC form as docRef
            • bundling into message or composition bundle
          • want to leverage use of observation for this profile
        • Translate APSR to FHIR – project ongoing in Germany (funded by the Ministry of Higher Education, not as part of HL7 Germany); all the activities are based on using APSR as the starting point – hope this will be the case that this is as generic as possible)
          • HL7 has a to-do item to describe how to express structured reports like pathology and radiology reports
        • CDA management group is discussing how to map CDA to FHIR later today
          • We need to keep an eye on that as well
      • The data transfer of the elements should be FHIR, but the content format should be kept out of this work
      • Next steps:
        • Overall decision vote could be in November
        • Need to identify vendors and implementers that are interested in supporting this proposal
          • Grady hospital in GA is interested in this for mammography
          • Also Mass General Hospital is interested
          • Pathologist/radiologist/vendors working on this:
            • Pathologists: George Birdsong; Veronica Klepeis; Ross Simpson
            • Radiologists:
            • Vendors who have confirmed support: Nuance Communications; Voicebrook; mTuitive
            • American College of Radiology and College of American Pathologists are leading the proposal
        • Narrow down the proposal to what we can accomplish in 18 months
        • Reach out to IHE Radiology as well before next call
        • Also reach out to IHE QRPH since that is where the SDC work is ongoing
        • Also may need to engage IHE ITI
  • SET
    • Updated document with comments to review for the next call / or close via email
    • Then bring back the message structure CR to HL7 OO
    • SET is being used to define a new FHIR resource in HL7 OO specimen project
  • Digital Pathology White Paper
    • Paper has been submitted
      • Some comments have been sent to Raj and he will review them
      • Revised document will still be shared later this week
      • A conclusion has been added in the updated paper; please review
  • Connectathon support for DPIA – not discussed