LOI+Vocabulary+WG+Meeting+Minutes+2012-07-03

include component="page" wikiName="siframework" page="LOI Header"

**Meeting Agenda:**

 * < **ID** ||< **Key Discussion Items** ||< **Duration** ||< **Presenter** ||
 * 1 || LRI Ballot Reconciliation: [[file:siframework/LRI Reconciliation Ballot 7-03-12.xlsx|LRI Reconciliation Ballot 7-03-12.xlsx]]
 * 183/184 - SPM.21 and SPM.24
 * 205 - Abnornal Flags, HL7 Table 0078 || 40 Minutes || WG Leads ||
 * < 2 ||< Follow-up from IG WG conference call
 * SNOMED recommendation
 * Reference IHTSDO as the specific SDO?
 * Observation Identifiers: [[file:siframework/Observation Identifiers_Vocab Response 20120628.doc|Observation Identifiers_Vocab Response 20120628.doc]]
 * Review proposed changes to Table 3-12; final outcome of LOINC Scale Conformance Statement ||< 15 Minutes ||< Cindy Johns ||
 * 3 || LOI Use Case Data Element Review
 * PV2-31 Recurring Service Code - User Defined HL70219
 * Definition: This field indicates whether the treatment is continuous. No suggested values in Table HL70219. || 5 Minutes || Cindy Johns ||

Attendance
Austin Kreisler, Bill Ormerod, Cindy Johns, Ernest Grove, Freida Hall, Jonathan Tadese, Lester Keepper, Rob Hausam, Shalina Wadhwani, Virginia Sturmfels, Zeshan Rajput

Action Items

 * **#** || **Action** || **Owner** || **Status** || **Due Date** ||
 * 1 || Add verbage to the footnotes of the Observation Identifiers Table || Austin Kreisler ||  ||   ||

Meeting Notes

 * Observation Identifiers**
 * Last week this information was presented to the LRI IG Analysis WG
 * The IG WG proposed “recommended” changes to SNOMED and removing a few conformance statements from the IG
 * They still have to determine what to do about the Observation Identifiers table
 * The IG Analysis group felt the information in the table was largely all the same
 * The core question is what to do about OBX-6: the table shows it as required, but the IG WG believes it should not be required for SN (ordinals)
 * Vocab’s concern is that if there are no units, the field is left empty
 * The condition predicate is enforced because this is a conditional field, so the note serves as guidance to say that when there are no units of measure you can use the information in Column A
 * When the condition predicate is true, the field is required
 * Austin will add additional verbage to the footnotes on units of measure to add to the Observation Identifiers table
 * The Vocab WG agrees to remove the OBX-8 column


 * LRI Ballot Reconciliation**
 * No. 183
 * The issue surround SPM.21 and SPM.24, where information on specimen conditions and specimen rejection are included,
 * They initially recommended SPM.21 and SPM.24 be optional so labs don’t carry this information in fields but is only sent in pre-text
 * The question to address is whether specimen condition information and specimen rejection information should be included in SPM.21 and SPM.24; if this is the case, should it be included as structured data?
 * The WG agrees to support the original recommendation and keep these two fields optional
 * No. 205
 * The comment stated that there were values added to HL70078; the question was if you have an abnormal flag that is positive or negative, could it be confused with positive and negative result values
 * If they constrain the table they have to call out the specific values they support
 * Another option would be to suggest not to adopt 2.7 and recommend the 2.5.1 version
 * Motion to support the HL7 V2.5.1 values for table 0078 – Abnormal Flags; 0 Against, 1 Abstain, 3 for


 * SNOMED CT**
 * Cindy will send this document back to the LRI IG Analysis WG with a revision to reference the specific Standards Development Organization

include component="page" wikiName="siframework" page="space.template.inc_contentleft_end"