HeD+Consensus+Statement+Feedback

include component="page" wikiName="siframework" page="HeD Header" This page will be used to capture feedback on the draft Consensus Statement, beginning on September 27th, 2012. At this time, the Health eDecisions Harmonization team is requesting revisions and feedback on the content and structure of the Consensus Statement. To provide feedback, please add your name, organization, section or sub-section you are providing feedback on, and your comments. If you would like to respond to any of the comments provided, please do so using the discussion board, which is accessible through the navigation bar in the upper right hand corner of the page. After comments have been addressed in the Health eDecisions WG meeting, comment resolution will be track in the table below. **The first round of feedback on the Consensus Statement is due by** ** COB Tuesday, October 2nd ** **.**

Please note that in order to provide feedback on the Consensus Statement, you must be a registered member of the S&I Framework wiki. Please visit the "Join the Initiative" portion of the Health eDecisions wiki page in order to sign up.

Community Feedback on Draft 1 of the Consensus Statement

 * < **Name** ||< **Organization** ||< **Consensus Statement Section** ||< **Comments** ||< **Resolution of Comments** ||
 * < Howard Strasberg ||< Wolters Kluwer Health ||< Use of Value Sets and Terminologies ||< I believe that ONC required the use of RxNorm to represent medication allergies in CCDA templates (although not for native EHR storage). If that's true, should this consensus statement also list RxNorm for allergies?

Also, we may want to distinguish between the medication that causes the allergy and the specific type of reaction. We might want to use RxNorm to specify the medication and SNOMED CT to specify the reaction. ||<  ||
 * < Victor Lee ||< Zynx Health ||< Assumptions ||< This comment pertains to the 4th bullet: "Model classes used in developing the schema map to underlying terminologies and standards, and that these mappings can be maintained using IDs." I actually assume the opposite—that the data models do NOT map to underlying terminologies, and this is a gap that we need to identify (part of HeD scope) and fill (outside of HeD scope). Happy to explain in further detail during an all-hands call. ||<  ||
 * < Victor Lee ||< Zynx Health ||< Open Questions for Workgroup Review ||< Agree that provider and patient information models can be excluded. From my standpoint, CDS artifacts should be designed at the population level, not specific to a provider or individual patient. The CDS artifact can later be used by a specific provider for a specific patient, but the CDS artifact itself does not need to support the provider or patient information model—that is already addressed by the EHR. ||<  ||
 * < Bernadette Minton ||< Zynx Health ||< General ||< Suggest that consensus statement include full list of standards under consideration, including version #, etc., along with a link to the documentation. This is especially important for any standards which play a major role in this effort (e.g., L3, CREF, etc.). ||<  ||
 * < Bernadette Minton ||< Zynx Health ||< Prior to Introduction ||< States that changes to existing specs will only be considered after testing. Without access to all the specs being considered (e.g., L3, CREF), it is not possible to ascertain how big / small the change set is likely to be. Changes to existing specs may need to be considered before testing, if a preliminary analysis identifies large gaps between the spec / standard and the HeD data elements specification. So more information is needed about all the specs being considered as starting points in order to comment on this statement. ||<  ||
 * < Bernadette Minton ||< Zynx Health ||< Introduction ||< Wrt: “and identifying any gaps/enhancements to be communicated to the respective SDOs” - need to specify how this will be handled in case where proposed standard not currently owned by an SDO. ||<  ||
 * < Bernadette Minton ||< Zynx Health ||< Introduction ||< Wrt: “The Health eDecisions Roadmap at the end of this page outlines the specific milestones and activities to be completed once consensus has been achieved” – roadmap is missing. ||<  ||
 * < Bernadette Minton ||< Zynx Health ||< Exclusion of Transport of the Knowledge Artifact ||< Wrt the second bullet point: I think I'm missing the connection: can you please add more information to indicate how the definition of data types is related to transport? ||<  ||
 * < Bernadette Minton ||< Zynx Health ||< Base Mappings and Transformations ||< Wrt “the intent is to provide a base level of mappings back to the underlying schemas used in harmonization” – does this mean that the underlying schemas will be modified to include all the data elements / structures in certain specified products, and this project will also provide information on how each part of the specified products is represented in the HeD schema? And relatedly, what is the set of specified products for which such a mapping will be provided? Or if not known at this time, then the candidate set? ||<  ||
 * Bernadette Minton || Zynx Health || General || it’s not clear to me what role L3 and CREF play in this effort, compared to the role played by for example: HL7 Order Set DSTU. This is my understanding, but please correct if necessary: (1) L3 will be the “candidate starting point for the HeD CDS Knowledge Artifact (KA) specification (2) Any data elements present in the HeD Use Case #1 spec, not present in L3, will be called out, and L3 will be modified to include these elements (3) In addition, a mapping will be provided to show how each data element in the HL7 Order Set DSTU relates to a corresponding data element in the revised L3 spec. **Is this correct?** ||  ||