Minutes - FHIR Validation Group 2024-08-29
From Health Level 7 Belgium Wiki
Revision as of 08:49, 29 August 2024 by JMPolfliet (talk | contribs)
Agenda
- New Topics
- Naming Convention for Logical models (Ilse Dossche)
- Need for a Published Glossary
- Diary Notes (linked to Vidis) (Didier Temans - Bart Verbeke)
- Business Publication on Website eSanté: Document validated by Stakeholders - For Information
- Next step: Patient Will
- Publication of core from the HL7 Core - Follow-up - Bart
- Update PopulationScreening - Veerle
- Note au Commité de Gestion - Remarks and Followup - JM
- FHIR Governance - Add QA + New steps regarding Commité de Gestion & Reporting - JM & Hanne
- Request for Publication for Medication - Follow-up - Jose
- FHIR-a-Thon - JM & Karlien
- There is a need for Clarification about the different versions for Vaccination in RSW vs Vitalink (Vaccination v2 vs v1)
- How to deal with the 2 versions: implementation aspect and documentation aspect (Business Documents)
- Vaccination topics (from Isabelle)
- Mise à disposition Mapping codes produits et vaccincodes -> Au niveau de la SAM v2 ? Est-ce que cette action est bien prise ne charge ? par qui ? quels sont les délais ?
- Publication sur le site eHealth standard du Mapping entre CD-VACCINEINDICATION (Kmehr) et vaccincodes (FHIR) -> normalement promis pour la fin du mois de juin 2024 ; ou en est-on ?
- Reference page for Build/Published Profiles - Meeting with JM & Jose
- Hanne Topics
- Documentation strategy: what is published when, by whom? -
- Business rules doc by esanté?
- IG + guidance by ehealth
- Both documents need to be 100% compatible in term of content
- What about generic technical information like versioning, use of security labels, use of identifiers, acces… ?
- FHIR versioning strategy
- Versioning of FHIR resources Is there a validated approach? If yes, where to find? If no, how to continue discussion and where to publish?
- Versioning of FHIR How to make a transition to another FHIR version work in the ecosystem? We need a clear documented approach, backwards compatibility,…
- Changes provided by the workgroup
- How to handle change requests that are provided by the workgroups?
- Alivia: question on organizing HL7 workgroups
- Business Docs must be available when the Release Candidate is ready for Feedback, and must be attached to the communication email
- Documentation strategy: what is published when, by whom? -
- Recurring topics
- Terminology Center Process
- Data Dictionary Template
- Datacapabilities Project - Andries
- Encounter - Trekker: Pablo
- Allergy - Request for change from Corilus - Ongoing
- General Rule Core package
- Unique Identifier
- Logical Model Lab IG
- Patient Death Reporting
- Projects Status
- Give projects overview for all active projects (Tools related)
- European Joined Actions feedback
- Caresets
- Next steps - Anne
- Others
- Caresets
- FHIR Strategy
- FHIR Versioning Strategy
- New Projects Proposal
- New Projects to come
- Cohbra over FHIR - JM - to be started
- Other Topics
- Allergy & Snomed: https://github.com/hl7-be/allergy/issues/110
- 'Must support' deprecation (from Hanne) - To be discussed
- I am currently in a meeting for Xt-HER (patient summary workshop) where I hear that the ‘MUST SUPPORT’ classification in HL7 FHIR will be deprecated due to possibility on different interpretations. I know this is not the case yet, and I also know that we are in a earlier FHIR version where it will be in use. But due to these future changes I was wondering if we should keep a focus on this classification for the coming projects. It’s an open question maybe to discuss during the next validation team.
- 'Must support' deprecation (from Hanne) - To be discussed
- Feedback Business Publication (from Hanne) - To be discussed
- Le KB78 n'existe plus et a été remplacé par la Loi relative à l'exercice des professions des soins de santé du 10 mai 2015 (WUG 2015). Je sais que nous parlons toujours des « KB78'ers » etc., mais je ne sais pas si nous pouvons y faire référence dans une publication formelle ?
- En effet, les publications actuelles sont mentionnées. Tant pour l'Allergie que pour la Vaccination, une nouvelle version a été proposée pour validation. Ne devrions-nous pas, depuis cette page, faire référence aux ‘releasecandidates ? En principe, toute personne connaissant FHIR (et capable de lire un IG) devrait pouvoir évaluer la valeur des deux IGs. Les pages GitHub me semblent également intéressantes ?
- Feedback Business Publication (from Hanne) - To be discussed
MEETING NOTES
- Naming Convention for Logical models (Ilse Dossche)
- Jose, Bart and Ilse will work together to make a first proposition
- Need for a Published Glossary
- Google doc have been started
- https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gut8dBs6urWCm1USIrYLlH84Nxpxf554QT0KEXJcWQI/edit?gid=0#gid=0
- Must be split : Technical Glossary, Medical Glossary
- Terminology
- How to avoid impacts of changes in new release (inactivation of a code, ...)
- Process must be put in place
- 2 tracks
- Adapt IG's to have a reference towards the Terminology Server (Not applicable for the Vaccination to published next week)
- Decide who is responsible as a Watchdog on the new releases