20:00 UTC on Tuesday 18 June 2019 - 90 minutes.
- FHIR Terminology Services and Resources
|Owner||Notes & Actions|
|1||Welcome and introductions||2|
Recording, notes & attendance.
|2||Summary of previous week and previous fortnight||10|
Dev Days June 10 - 12 Redmond ML - increasing interest from people implementing FHIR in other contexts and having terminology support. Post Coordination is not generally on people's radar. Question around semantics of $closure when you're dealing with multiple versions and inactive concepts/attributes via ECL.
Thursday half hour session. Title of session: "SNOMED on FHIR" Content: Profiles (eg Allergy Intolerance), Free Set, Implementation Guide, discussing and sharing.
Proposed changes to ConceptMap resource:
Issue when there is equivalence between source and target. See tracker item: https://gforge.hl7.org/gf/project/fhir/tracker/?action=TrackerItemEdit&tracker_item_id=22632
7 Changes proposed to ConceptMap. Group.element.target.equivalence is going to change to "relationship" and the type of the relationship stated - new Valueset conceptMapRelationship (previous VS retired). Relationships enumeration will be: relatedTo, Equiv, Broader, Narrower, Not Related
ML - this has implications for $closure (which returns a concept map which uses other values eg subsumes).
RD: "Unmapped" is to be used by default when there is no target. Tracker to give advice on how to work in this resource with FHIR extensions.
Clarification needed of the reverse flag in ConceptMap $translate
Returning concepts from the "source" valueset where the code supplied is a member of the "target" valueset. Ontoserver (for example) will treat the "source" valueset as the target when no target is supplied.
Follow up discussion on finding all refsets that a particular concept is a member of (relates to both
PWI spoke to Linda who is interested to know the use cases. ML says it's a proxy for the importance of the concept ie is it in wide use. Can also give a sense of where it is used, and by whom.
PJ has suggested (as an alternative to enhancing ECL for this) that a standard property (ie a well known) for a SNOMED code could include a list of all reference sets which include this concept. Note that language reference sets are not a good example because they reference description ids (double indirection).
Should non-defining relationship show up as properties in a lookup. The question of whether or not ECL will consider these is delegated to the choice of substrate, but the default substrate does not ( ?) specify if they are or not.
|8||Publication of FHIR Free Set||2|
Green - Grahame to provide feedback for next week.
Amber - documents going to Patient Care Group (meeting next week).
Update 23 April: Terminology Binding group moving on to remaining Valuesets.
Update 18 June : JC Parts of finding hierarchy contain context that can put us at odds with a hierarchy that FHIR might want, and this context (ML) may not be visible in the FSN.
|9||SNOMED FHIR Implementation Guide||60|
Progressing the SNOMED Implementation Guide and specific guidance of "Best Practice" of using SNOMED with FHIR. Can we include tests for 'correctness' - using existing FHIR Testing platforms?
Tooling: Current tooling appears to be solely command line based. See also Snapper for value set editing (currently STU3).
What is the scope of content for the guide? Targeting "Best Practice" for FHIR Implementers using SNOMED CT. Possible layered approach and potentially strict (for internal record keeping and communication) vs permissive profiles when . General guidance for bindings or specific details on each resource.
Audiences - Developer vs User of implemented services. ML Suggests single entry point document with multiple paths through the documentation.
8 January 2019 Update:
Tooling: Forge (doesn't support R4)
What do we want to say about how SNOMED should be used in FHIR? Eg On the Terminology Services side, start with a narrative and head towards a test script where a particular query is expected (formally) to return a given set of results. Then on the resource side, talking about what particular value sets should be used for specific resources - condition code being a high value. Will we insist that these are SNOMED code or could they be proxy codes eg where a medication is given on a problem list and - in it's presence - indicates the underlying condition but without specifying that explicitly.
Start with a Confluence page for collaborative work and once that's reached some stage of maturity it can be moved into the GitHub repository in a more structured form.
Are we looking at one implementation guide or two? Terminology Server vs Terminology Binding and Profiles.
|10||Mechanism for working with Languages.||15||Reuben Daniels|
Michael Lawley has raised ticket about the "use" field being limited to FSN/Synonym. Elsewhere in FHIR there is a "display" code that can be used to indicate other languages See 22490. Also 19960 - additional term for "Consumer Terms" ready for implementation R5 (Q4 2020 at the earliest).
18 June PWI gave some notes from pop-up session at FHIR Dev Days - more about locale than language. ML: "Translation" extension doesn't allow for a particular piece of text being in a different language from that of the resource.
On Hold / Maintenance
Any other business