OMG Healthcare DTF Notes - Burlingame 03 February 2005

Healthcare DTF Notes – Burlingame 03 February 2005

Welcome & Opening Remarks

DH – rant about so many interoperability organizations and the need to play together

RS – used international plug analogy for standards; need for adapters; modeling is the way to adapt

How will OMG interact with the HL7 process?

Ken – HL7 Services Project report, including Project Objectives

We need to embrace and understand both the XML and the model in order to approach semantic interoperability

Review of the Concept Paper

There is a perception in Europe that HL7 is NOT a leader in domain and semantic specifications

Discussion about whether OMG has a single definition of a “platform”

Alan suggests that the term “computationally independent” replace “platform”

How do we engage other standards bodies, like NCPDP – which has standards embedded in legislation

Discussion of exactly how the OMG-HL7 collaboration relationship will work in reality – how will vendors and users implement and use specifications produced by the process?

Should include other standards like X.12

It is important to Kaiser that the major healthcare software vendors be involved – ideally as submitters – but at least as implementers. Write into RFPs?

The history of the RFP process in OMG is that if a vendor is not involved in the drafting in the document, the process will fail

Suggestion to produce a plan with dates and milestones that specifies critical success factors for producing the first #N specifications, along with consequences of not meeting the dates

Need to produce a formal articulation of a division of responsibilities between OMG HDTF and the HL7 Services Project and to publish it

Define the artifacts and dependencies using an example. Make up the rules as we go along.

Need to adopt the Project Charter as developed in the HL7 Services Project and send out a press release.

Project Planning

Need to look at specializing the RFP template for this activity.

Need a formal or explicit definition of the specification process

What defines a “good” service candidate?

Need to identify how the OMG HDTF schedule maps to the HL7 Services – what do we want to produce in CY 2005 – RFPs, LOIs?

Since the HL7 Services are dependent on the HL7 RIM, which is not set, can we structure RFPs to “grab” whatever current HL7 models exist?

HL7 service specifications can be sub-divided into multiple OMG Services RFPs.

Need to secure approval of Project Charter by HL7 & OMG Board

Schedule out-of-cycle meetings of HL7 Service Project and OMG HDTF

Steps	Products	Who
Establish selection criteria	Service selection criteria functional technical business
Evaluate the list against them
Recruit submitters
Select and prioritize	Prioritized short list
Define format for the HL7 CIM template	HL7 CIM template
Establish CIM quality criteria	CIM quality criteria
Establish project teams
Produce the CIM (normal HL7 ballot process to occur post-pilot) assess governmental, legislative, statutory and other external drivers identify conformance criteria	[Balloted] CIM spec conformance profile
OMG-HL7 Review
Determines OMG RFP strategy for HL7 CIM	List of RFPs – RFP scope
Produce RFPs	RFP1, RFP2, …
Assess RFP against conformance criteria include governmental, legislative, statutory and other external drivers
Issue RFP consistent with OMG process (normal OMG RFP process)	LOI, responses/submissions, etc.
Evaluate initial submissions
Evaluate final submissions
Move to adopt	Recommendation for adoption
Process assessment/feedback

	Static		Dynamic
Enterprise	(EHR Functional Model)	y		y
Information		y	(static changes)	y
Computational	(EHR Functional Model Infrastructure section)	y
Engineering
Technology

From:	Nicole Glazen Rikkinen [SMTP:nicole@omg.org]
To:	healthcare@omg.org
Cc:

Subject:	Burlingame Technical Meeting, Healthcare DTF Meeting Notes
Sent:	2/3/05 8:52 PM	Importance:	Normal

ihc message