Difference between revisions of "Minutes - Population Health WG 2022-11-22"

From Health Level 7 Belgium Wiki
Line 39: Line 39:
 
::* Kurt is going to prepare the necessary info for next WG meeting
 
::* Kurt is going to prepare the necessary info for next WG meeting
  
* [https://github.com/hl7-be/public-health/issues/11 Issue #9]: BeObservation
+
* [https://github.com/hl7-be/public-health/issues/9 Issue #9]: BeObservation
::*  
+
::* a codeable concept should be used, then LOINC should be used (LOINC was used for labresults, snomed CT for other than labresults)
 +
::* if LOINC will be used, no changes are needed to
 +
::* to be checked with NRC and LOINC responsable persons whether it shoould be LOINC or Snomed CT codes - Bart will contact NRC
  
* 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
+
* [https://github.com/hl7-be/public-health/issues/8 Issue #8]: nextInvitation
::* the branch is not yet merged (issue #1 branch) so some issues cannot be closed yet
+
::* it can be a list of reasons (text) but a date should also possible
::* issue #3: agreed to move to core package - no WG core meeting has been set yet
+
::* appointment doesn't seem to fit
::* issue #6: the WG core has to add a logical model for BePatient
+
::* change in logical model
::* 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 [https://kankerregister.org/handleidingen%20applicaties 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
+
* when could we expect a publication ?
 +
::* actors & transactors have to be added to the guidance
 +
::* if no more remarks, publication can be prepared
  
 
=== Action Items ===
 
=== Action Items ===

Revision as of 09:59, 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • the references to Be-profiles have to be added wherever appropriate
  • Kurt is going to prepare the necessary info for next WG meeting
  • a codeable concept should be used, then LOINC should be used (LOINC was used for labresults, snomed CT for other than labresults)
  • if LOINC will be used, no changes are needed to
  • to be checked with NRC and LOINC responsable persons whether it shoould be LOINC or Snomed CT codes - Bart will contact NRC
  • it can be a list of reasons (text) but a date should also possible
  • appointment doesn't seem to fit
  • change in logical model
  • when could we expect a publication ?
  • actors & transactors have to be added to the guidance
  • if no more remarks, publication can be prepared

Action Items

  • resolution of open issues

Date next meeting

  • Tuesday 6 Dec at 10AM