[health-ont] Fwd: Electronic Medical Record Topic for UDEF Vendor Challenge

[Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>]

Hi Folks,

I am fowarding this because the EHR issue is already hot and, at some 
point, in some way, we should address it in addition to the other 
concerns on our collective plates. It's a very busy time, but the 
notion of a UDEF vendor challenge is something that could affect the 
overall problem space.


Cheers,
Rex

>X-Original-To: health-ont@ontolog.cim3.net
>Delivered-To: health-ont@mccarthy.cim3.com
>Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 11:55:08 -0600
>From: "Ed Dodds" <dodds@conmergence.com>
>To: health-ont@ontolog.cim3.net, "Rubin, Ken" <ken.rubin@eds.com>,
>	alan.p.honey@kp.org, eishays@us.ibm.com,
>	"John C Hardin" <John.Hardin@sun.com>,
>	"John Casillas" <johnc@mbproject.org>, thomas@deepthought.com.au,
>	sam.heard@oceaninformatics.biz
>X-Google-Sender-Auth: f44583a4d059e381
>Subject: [health-ont] Fwd: Electronic Medical Record Topic for UDEF Vendor
>	Challenge
>X-BeenThere: health-ont@ontolog.cim3.net
>Reply-To: dodds@conmergence.com,
>	"[health-ont] " <health-ont@ontolog.cim3.net>
>List-Id: "\[health-ont\] " <health-ont.ontolog.cim3.net>
>List-Unsubscribe: <http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/health-ont>,
>	<mailto:health-ont-request@ontolog.cim3.net?subject=unsubscribe>
>List-Archive: <http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/health-ont>
>List-Post: <mailto:health-ont@ontolog.cim3.net>
>List-Help: <mailto:health-ont-request@ontolog.cim3.net?subject=help>
>List-Subscribe: <http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/health-ont>,
>	<mailto:health-ont-request@ontolog.cim3.net?subject=subscribe>
>Sender: health-ont-bounces@ontolog.cim3.net
>X-Rcpt-To: <rexb@starbourne.com>
>X-DPOP: Version number supressed
>
>FYI Please forward to interested parties. Ed
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>From: Schuldt, Ron L <ron.l.schuldt@lmco.com>
>Date: Feb 15, 2007 11:19 AM
>Subject: Electronic Medical Record Topic for UDEF Vendor Challenge
>To: udef@opengroup.org
>
>To help launch discussion on the topic of Electronic Health Records
>(EHR) for a possible vendor challenge, I recommend that you read the
>interview published by Health-IT World at
>http://tmlr.net/jump/?c=24310&a=296&m=4327&p=0&t=164  The article
>provides excellent insight to many of the issues and opportunities
>associated with EHR.
>
>
>
>Assuming the non technical barriers to sharing medical record
>information among medical providers are solved (by laws or other
>government action), one of the data architecture issues is the need
>for interoperable semantics across the many applications used by the
>many providers. This semantic interoperability issue is one that the
>UDEF can help solve. I offer the following to help stimulate
>discussion.
>
>
>
>I recommend that we begin by identifying suitable data element
>concepts that one can expect to find within a typical EHR. Note: you
>can find the definition of a data element concept in ISO/IEC 11179-1
>available for download at http://metadata-standards.org/11179/
>
>
>
>I believe we will find data element concepts that address the
>Electronic Health Record itself - a UDEF "Document" object. Properties
>associated with the EHR could include an identifier assigned by the
>health provider. The current UDEF "Document" object has UDEF name
>"Record.Document" with UDEF ID "l.2" and will need an extension for
>"Medical.Record.Document" and tentative UDEF ID "e.l.2"  Similarly,
>the current UDEF "Identifier" property has "Assigned.Identifier" with
>UDEF ID "35.8" and will need an extension such as
>"Health-Provider.Assigned.Identifier" with tentative UDEF ID "16.35.8"
>
>Therefore, the complete UDEF name and ID for the proposed data element
>concept Medical Record Document Health Provider Assigned Identifier
>would have the UDEF ID "e.l.2_16.35.8"  See the UDEF Document object
>tree at http://www.opengroup.org/udefinfo/objdoc.htm and the UDEF
>Identifier property tree at
>http://www.opengroup.org/udefinfo/prpide.htm
>
>
>
>Another set of data element concepts relevant to EHR must address the
>person for whom the record is about. Within the context of the EHR,
>the person has the role of Patient and may have multiple possible
>identifiers. One candidate data element concept is Patient Person
>Government Assigned Identifier with UDEF ID "au.5_13.35.8" and another
>possible data element concept is Patient Person Health-Provider
>Assigned Identifier with UDEF ID "au.5_16.35.8"
>
>
>
>The government assigned identifier might be a driver's license number
>plus the state which issued the license or it might be a social
>security number. Unique identification of a person is a topic that
>will require government involvement to achieve a consistent approach.
>Until then, I suspect there will be multiple options that will be
>allowable.
>
>
>
>I encourage others on this list to submit other data element concepts
>that are relevant to Electronic Health Records. If you need guidance
>for extending the UDEF, please download the free Guide for Extending
>the UDEF at http://www.opengroup.org/bookstore/catalog/g064.htm
>
>
>
>The challenge to the vendors on this list is to define tools that will
>help simplify the UDEF mapping and gap analysis process. If possible,
>it would be great if the tool vendors could show their products at the
>next Open Group Conference meeting in Paris, April 23-25, 2007 or at
>least by the meeting in Austin, July 23-25, 2007.
>
>
>
>
>Ron Schuldt, Chairman
>
>The Open Group UDEF Forum
>
>303-977-1414
>
>ron.l.schuldt@lmco.com
>
>
>________________________________
>
>
>From: Schuldt, Ron L
>Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 2:16 PM
>To: udef@opengroup.org
>Subject: Suggested Topic for Vendor Challenge
>
>
>
>During last Friday's UDEF Interested Parties telecon, one of the
>topics discussed included the need for a vendor challenge that would
>highlight the value that the UDEF could bring to a high visibility
>problem. Three topics were mentioned during the call - Homeland
>Security, Electronic Health Records, and Emergency Situation Response.
>
>
>
>One candidate high visibility topic is Electronic Health Records. It
>is my understanding that all companies above a certain size will soon
>be required to maintain electronic health records of their employees.
>This topic is high on the priority list for several organizations
>currently participating in the UDEF Interested Parties including a
>company that is working on a pilot to demonstrate how the UDEF could
>be used to remotely exchange patient medical information based on
>sensors with systems that one might find in a doctor's office.
>
>
>
>The goal of the Vendor Challenge would be to demonstrate that systems
>could be independently mapped to the UDEF and then semantically
>aligned with the gap analysis tool that is available online at
>https://jserver.opengroup.org/UDEF/UdefReport1 Sample source and
>target files in XML format can be downloaded from the Gap Analysis
>section of http://www.opengroup.org/udefinfo/
>
>
>
>We should identify a suitable subset of an Electronic Health Record
>and include the extensions necessary in the next cycle of UDEF
>extensions. The next cycle of extensions would be approved at the
>Paris meeting http://www.opengroup.org/paris2007/
>
>
>
>I welcome your comments and suggestions.
>
>
>
>Ron Schuldt, Chairman
>
>The Open Group UDEF Forum
>
>303-977-1414
>
>ron.l.schuldt@lmco.com
>  _________________________________________________________________
>Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/health-ont/
>Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/health-ont/NHIN-RFI/
>To  Post: mailto:health-ont@ontolog.cim3.net
>Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?NhinRfi


-- 
Rex Brooks
President, CEO
Starbourne Communications Design
GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
Berkeley, CA 94702
Tel: 510-849-2309