Date/Time
20:00 UTC on Tuesday 3 September 2019 - 90 minutes.
Objectives
- Bindings to FHIR Clinical Resources (e.g. value set bindings)
Meeting Details
Online: https://snomed.zoom.us/my/snomedhl7
Phone: See https://zoom.us/zoomconference for available phone numbers (meeting id 242-348-6949)
Chat: snomedIntl.slack.com #snomed-hl7-fhir
Attendees
Rob Hausam, Peter G. Williams, Jeremy Rogers
Apologies
Meeting Recording
https://snomed.zoom.us/recording/share/ID5oFwY-RmXx8AfmkWDCbs-VbKVqt85_Nyd6wgM17dywIumekTziMw
Discussion items
Item | Description | Mins | Owner | Notes & Actions | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Welcome and introductions | 5 | Recording + Notes. | ||||||||||
2 | Summary of previous week (TS) and previous TB | 5 | |||||||||||
3 | Future meetings | 5 | Jane Millar |
KL Meeting - JR can we do some connectathon type activities at the Sunday afternoon? Next FHIR DevDays Amsterdam, November 20 – 22, 2019 14 September Atlanta connectathon will feature breakout session for SNOMED CT Terminology Services Peter Jordan suggests creating the relevant ValueSets to support our suggested bindings for current profiles. | |||||||||
4 | Free Set Response | 30 | Group discussion on response to HL7 for Free Set / Mapping by Jim Case (see update July 2019) here: FHIR SNOMED CT Free Set - Consider for inclusion / rejection (Red mappings) | ||||||||||
5 | Implementation Guide | 10 | Did we conclude on the best approach(es) for semantic overlap between fields as discussed in Terminology Binding Update: Option 4 seems the most elegant - "BodySite must always be a specialization or self of finding site" although BodySite is an easy example since the mapping to the SNOMED concept model (finding site) is well understood. It would not work for Condition.Status where resolved/remission is not represented in attribute values. | ||||||||||
6 | Free SNOMED CT Set for FHIR | 10 | 25 June. Grahame keen to see work done on both sides to bring us closer together in the ValueSets concerned with clinical safety: - AdverseEvent.outcome (red) - Condition.clinicalStatus & AllergyIntolerance.clinicalStatus (amber) These are the same items although in separate Valuesets. HL7 could discuss making them a single ValueSet. Grahame looking for times for a face to face meeting, see Zulip.
| ||||||||||
7 | Observation resource | 30 | See updates here: Observation binding | ||||||||||
8 | Exemplar Profile | X | Publishing Profiles
Options for Profile discussion:
Notes 26 Feb: UK working on pathology reporting - diagnostic / observation. Suggestion that we try out two types of profile, both of which avoid issues of conflict between fields within the information model:
28 May: Plan to publish profile for the October conference (8 sessions + working between meetings. Completion for review Tues 14 October (or earlier since we'll need time to complete the IG?)
Tooling for profiles: Forge (.NET) is now R4
RH: Suggestion that "published" valuesets would be read-only. | ||||||||||
9 | Allergies | X | Revisit any outstanding questions on Allergies. External publication of v0.1 of the AllergyIntolerance resource | ||||||||||
10 | Vital Signs | 84 | Daniel Karlsson | Vital Signs Profile of Observation Resource Jeremy's work to compare Vital signs profile and SNOMED Subhierarchy - issues with eg blood pressure. Complex expression constraints available which cover the use of observables by the NHS(UK). Mapping to LOINC codes. See Spreadsheet attached to: SNOMED on FHIR Meeting (TB) - Tuesday 21 August 2018 Issues / Discussion :
2019-08-20: Update of the Vital Signs panel binding page. Discussion about the Vital Signs FHIR profiles and how to profile those to SNOMED profiles. We are going to create SNOMED profiles on the specific FHIR Vital Signs profile (e.g. Heart rate) and declare conformance with a generic SNOMED Vital Signs profile. | |||||||||
11 | v3.0.1 ProcedureRequest ReferralRequest v3.4.0 (publication Aug 19?) ServiceRequest | X | These two separate resources existed in the FHIR 3.0.1 Spec. Rob Hausambut have been removed in 4.0 and replaced with ServiceRequest http://build.fhir.org/servicerequest.html → ServiceRequest Questions:
Need to revisit the original questions raised in this group wrt the two separate resources of yore, and consider whether the same issues persists wrt the new single ServiceRequest resource. | ||||||||||
12 | Next meeting | 5 | 17 September - clash with HL7 Atlanta meeting.
Next Resource for discussion: JR suggested focus on progressing the profile to a point where it can be shared with the wider world, which could then be build on with other resources. Share progress with IG! Further discussion on Terminology Binding Overlap (particularly of interest to Kirstine Rosenbeck Gøeg who may be able to share something at some point). |
Meeting Files