Difference between revisions of "Minutes - Population Health WG 2022-11-22"
From Health Level 7 Belgium Wiki
KarlienErauw (talk | contribs) (Created page with "=== Attendees === * Bart Decuypere * Brecht Van Vooren * Hanne Vuegen * Jean-Michel Polfliet * Karlien Erauw * Kurt Dhaene * Patrick Beyltjens === Excused === * José Costa T...") |
KarlienErauw (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
* Issues overview | * Issues overview | ||
* [https://github.com/hl7-be/public-health/issues/14 Issue #14]: it is a Flemisch screening - how to deal with translations | * [https://github.com/hl7-be/public-health/issues/14 Issue #14]: it is a Flemisch screening - how to deal with translations | ||
+ | ::* content can be translated | ||
+ | ::* there is no standard translation for the fields but cannot be determined today and will have to be dealt with with end user | ||
+ | ::* if needed it will be adressed in the guidance | ||
+ | * [https://github.com/hl7-be/public-health/issues/13 Issue #13]: flow for identification | ||
+ | ::* sender and receiver have to agree | ||
+ | ::* sender can give UUID, receiver decides what to do with it and include it when sending info back | ||
+ | ::* WG agrees with the UUID proposal | ||
+ | |||
+ | * [https://github.com/hl7-be/public-health/issues/13 Issue #13]: confirm follow up advice | ||
+ | ::* currently only follow up advice for colon cancer ; there is a snomed CT code for colonoscopy | ||
+ | ::* follow-up advice for patient if screening has deviating results | ||
+ | ::* objective is to include follow up advice upon breast cancer screenings ; follow up advice should be aligned with what is written in the letter to the GP/gyn, to check if snomed CT codes exist | ||
+ | |||
+ | * [https://github.com/hl7-be/public-health/issues/11 Issue #11]: review references to resources | ||
+ | ::* the references to Be-profiles have to be added wherever appropriate | ||
+ | |||
+ | * [https://github.com/hl7-be/public-health/issues/10 Issue #10]: actors & transactions | ||
+ | ::* Kurt is going to prepare the necessary info for next WG meeting | ||
+ | |||
+ | * [https://github.com/hl7-be/public-health/issues/11 Issue #9]: BeObservation | ||
+ | ::* | ||
* Is the rework on the logical model finished, available here: https://build.fhir.org/ig/hl7-be/public-health/branches/issue-1/StructureDefinition-BePopulationScreening.html | * Is the rework on the logical model finished, available here: https://build.fhir.org/ig/hl7-be/public-health/branches/issue-1/StructureDefinition-BePopulationScreening.html | ||
Line 41: | Line 62: | ||
=== Date next meeting === | === Date next meeting === | ||
− | * Tuesday | + | * Tuesday 6 Dec at 10AM |
Revision as of 09:37, 22 November 2022
Attendees
- Bart Decuypere
- Brecht Van Vooren
- Hanne Vuegen
- Jean-Michel Polfliet
- Karlien Erauw
- Kurt Dhaene
- Patrick Beyltjens
Excused
- José Costa Teixeira
- Veerle Michiels
Agenda
- Resolution of issues
Minutes
- Rework of Logical model has finished
- Issues overview
- Issue #14: it is a Flemisch screening - how to deal with translations
- content can be translated
- there is no standard translation for the fields but cannot be determined today and will have to be dealt with with end user
- if needed it will be adressed in the guidance
- Issue #13: flow for identification
- sender and receiver have to agree
- sender can give UUID, receiver decides what to do with it and include it when sending info back
- WG agrees with the UUID proposal
- Issue #13: confirm follow up advice
- currently only follow up advice for colon cancer ; there is a snomed CT code for colonoscopy
- follow-up advice for patient if screening has deviating results
- objective is to include follow up advice upon breast cancer screenings ; follow up advice should be aligned with what is written in the letter to the GP/gyn, to check if snomed CT codes exist
- Issue #11: review references to resources
- the references to Be-profiles have to be added wherever appropriate
- Issue #10: actors & transactions
- Kurt is going to prepare the necessary info for next WG meeting
- Issue #9: BeObservation
- Is the rework on the logical model finished, available here: https://build.fhir.org/ig/hl7-be/public-health/branches/issue-1/StructureDefinition-BePopulationScreening.html
- the branch is not yet merged (issue #1 branch) so some issues cannot be closed yet
- issue #3: agreed to move to core package - no WG core meeting has been set yet
- issue #6: the WG core has to add a logical model for BePatient
- issue #7: are we going to model the results in the same way as done for the Lab results, see BeObservationLaboratory https://build.fhir.org/ig/hl7-be/lab/StructureDefinition-be-observation-laboratory.html, snapshot table and at https://ehealth.fgov.be/standards/fhir/core-clinical/StructureDefinition-be-observation.html, differential table
- mandatory fields: code
- mustSupport fields: language, identifier, status, category, code, (most probably not needed: hasMember, derivedFrom)
- are there LOINC codes for the tests that are being done ?
- the only observation that will be shared is "afwijking", so only code
- recommendation: make it only dependent on BeObservation so the WG core has to add a logical model for BeObservation
- issue #8 nextInvitationIndication: currently there is a text, expectation for the patient when to expect his next appointment
- it seems that there is currently no business need to structure this, it also depends on the advices from SKR
- more investigation has to be done, check now which current "texts" are currently used
- There are some new issues/questions: https://github.com/hl7-be/public-health/issues
Action Items
- resolution of open issues
Date next meeting
- Tuesday 6 Dec at 10AM