20:00 UTC on Tuesday 17 September 2019 - 90 minutes.
- Bindings to FHIR Clinical Resources (e.g. value set bindings)
|Owner||Notes & Actions|
|1||Welcome and introductions||5|
Recording + Notes.
Summary of previous week (TS) and previous TB
|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)|
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.
Update 17 Sept: If we were to express ValueSets for profiles using Refsets (which this group would have to curate and publish) then National Centres could add to those refsets using their own module.
If a refset contained a query specification which was referenced as ECL in a Valueset which was expanded, is it obvious that we would want the result of the query, rather than the query itself? ^^ double expansionMichael Lawley ecl=^1234556701
Update 24 Sept: This has been discussed in the context of ECL. A reference set of reference set Ids wouldn't do anything special - we don't check the concept ids to see what they are before returning. And the memberOf operator is only concerned with the referencedComponentId, so if there was another field (simple map) containing some ECL, then ECL doesn't allow for that to be referenced.
See 22.214.171.124 Query Specification Reference Set NB that there is only one 900000000000513000 |Simple query specification reference set (foundation metadata concept)| and the referenced component id is a concept representing the query. The double de-reference operator is defined in ECL: ^^900000000000513000 - but that would be all of them, so do we instead just single dereference the query specification concept itself?
|7||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.
See updates here: Observation binding
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.
Revisit any outstanding questions on Allergies.
External publication of v0.1 of the AllergyIntolerance resource
|11||Vital Signs||84||Daniel Karlsson|
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 :
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.
v3.4.0 (publication Aug 19?)
These two separate resources existed in the FHIR 3.0.1 Spec. Rob Hausambut have been removed in 4.0 and replaced with ServiceRequest
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.
1 October (Note Peter and Jeremy will be in Cardiff for NHS Event)
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!