Minutes - Core Profiles WG 2024-03-06

From Health Level 7 Belgium Wiki
Revision as of 09:15, 6 March 2024 by KarlienErauw (talk | contribs) (Created page with "===== Attendees ===== * Bart Decuypere * Benny Verhamme * Brian Thieren * Dominiek Leclerq * Elien De Koker * Ivan Coppieters * José Costa Teixeira * Lodewijk Sioen * Karli...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Attendees
  • Bart Decuypere
  • Benny Verhamme
  • Brian Thieren
  • Dominiek Leclerq
  • Elien De Koker
  • Ivan Coppieters
  • José Costa Teixeira
  • Lodewijk Sioen
  • Karlien Erauw
  • Marcelo Romero-Cors (Abrumet)
  • Maxime Caucheteur
  • Pablo Christiaens
  • Steven Van den Berghe
  • Werner De Mulder
Excused/Not present
  • Anne Nerenhausen
  • Anthony Maton
  • Benny Verhamme
  • Brecht Van Vooren
  • Cyprien Janssens
  • Didier Temans
  • Erwin Bellon
  • Félix De Tavernier
  • Filoretta Velica
  • Hanne Vuegen
  • Isabelle Pollet
  • Jean-Michel Polfliet
  • Marco Busschots
  • Nick Hermans
  • Nico Vannieuwenhuyze
  • Philippe Baise
  • Philip Sidgwick
  • Stef Hoofd
Agenda
Minutes
  • Last time we agreed on the solution proposed for the Document Reference
  • we have subject, author, context and related resources (type from int'l level)
  • do we have to add anything to context? it is ok for the WG
  • content: has attachment that has f.e. the url ; do we only put content.attachment as MustSupport ; content.Type: make mandatory ; content.Type, data, url will have to be MustSupport ; contentType is code while in logical model it is a string ; content, content.attachment and category will be MustSupport. These changes will be applied in the FHIR profile ; see here
  • publication could happen on 5 April as it has to go through the FHIR validation meeting
  • logical model for BeCommunication has not yet been prepared, HL7 Belgium core team will prepare this work for the next meeting
  • some work needs to be done on other logical models for profiles that exist since a long time ; input from RIZIV will be necessary
  • does the gender have to be mandatory, it is often very useful but it is not mandatory for some use cases ; for GDPR matters you have to be looked at data minimalization
  • the WG agrees that the gender should not be mandatory (some systems will have to do an impact analysis when this change will be applied)
  • However, each specification is free to impose some constraints on the presence of the gender. We will describe this in the guidance of the core IG.
Next agenda meeting agenda points
  • continue work on document reference, review logical model
  • resolution of issues (f.e. 52 - 60 - 63 - 64)
Next meetings
  • Wednesday 20 March at 9AM - meeting invites will be sent asap