DBT FT Evaluation

Proposal

The Digital Breast Tomosynthesis profile has been nominated for advancement to Final Text. (Advocate: Antje Schroeder) Per the Final Text Process, Items in blue text below warrant Committee discussion.

Technical Committee Checklist

• Are all significant CPs against the profile "closed"?

[Antje] There are no open DBT CPs

• Are all significant CPs against the underlying standards "closed"?

[Antje] There are no DBT related CPs in DICOM

• Have all significant comments been CP'd or rejected?

[Antje] Yes

• Have all open issues listed in the Supplement been closed?

The first open issue can be closed, the supplement is aligned with DICOM CP 1342

Open issue 2 (Should Evidence Creators particiapte in the For Processing Breast Projection X-Ray Images Option) is still open, but I would recommend to close with any further action, since no feedback was received regarding this topic

• Have all significant issues at Connectathon been dealt with?

[Antje] After checking with Lynn Felhofer and David Clunie, no issues have been raised at the Connectathon.

• Gather feedback from implementers via a formal questionnaire to Connectathon participants

[Antje] See above

• Has the Connectathon Project Manager been queried and significant issues addressed?

[Antje] See above

Planning Committee Checklist

The Planning Committee votes on the Tech Cmte proposal to Final Text the supplement.

• Put Final Text Decision on the planning committee agenda
  • Consider doing this a couple months before new TF version will be released so it can be incorporated.
  • It's helpful to assign an advocate for the supplement at this time to check/prepare the evidence for the upcoming checklist rather than go hunting for it during the meeting
• Run down the following checklist for each proposed supplement
  • Has the profile been through a Connectathon in at least two regions?

[Antje] Yes (NA 2015 and 2016, and EU 2015 and 2016)

• • Has the profile been successfully tested with all actors at least at one Connectathon?

[Antje] All major actors (Acquisition Modalities, Image Displays and Image Manager/Archives) have been tested. However Evidence Creators, Print Composers and Servers have not been tested

• • Have different implementations of each actor in the profile been tested?
  • Have all the options been tested successfully at at least one Connectathon?
  • Are there IHE-provided software testing tools to address all aspects of the profile?
  • Have the standards underlying the profile been implemented? In similar use cases? In healthcare? In general IT?
  • (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?)
  • Have all issues that may have been raised about the profile been resolved?
  • Has there been sufficient interest in the profile to generate a one-page overview of the profile
• Debate checklist exceptions (failure of any of the above is cause for discussion)
• Record checklist findings and conclusions of the debate in your meeting minutes
• Hold and record formal vote
• Communicate results to TC