CIMI MTF Minutes 20140911

Revision as of 10:51, 17 December 2014 by Harold R Solbrig (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search

CIMI Modeling Taskforce - Meeting Minutes

Thursday 11 September 2014 @ 20:00-22:00 UTC


  • Stan Huff
  • Linda Bird
  • Deepak Sharma
  • Patrick Langford
  • Sarah Ryan
  • Daniel Karlsson
  • Rob Hausam
  • Thomas Beale
  • Joey Coyle
  • Gerard Freriks
  • Patrick Langford
  • Harold Solbrig
  • Eithne Keelaghan

Draft Agenda

  • Proposal for CIMI to become a part of IHTSDO
  • Arrangements for the CIMI Modelling Taskforce face-to-face meeting in Oakland
    • Agenda planning
      • Finalize terminology binding and use
        • Finalize the RM representation of coded_text
        • Post coordination in a coded field
      • Finalize specialization patterns
      • General review of current lab contents
        • Style issues
      • Goal: Lab models ready for alpha publication
      • Examples of instance data in the models
      • Ideas for the next set of models
      • Generating FHIR profiles from CIMI models
      • Review AML especially with respect to the representation of example models
    • Terminology Binding Topics (whatever is current), such as:
    • Introducing URIs to Coded Text
    • Defining fixed value and value set bindings in ADL
  • Specializing identifiers from CIMI patterns in ADL
  • Review of next steps

Detailed Meeting Minutes

Stan: Thanks for being here. I sent out a draft - is it OK? First - a brief update on executive activities on CIMI... becoming a part of IHTSDO. Not a discussion though. Want to do planning about the Oakland meeting... What we want to accomplish. Then terminology binding... Since I missed last meeting, I am not sure where we are at. And other issues on the agenda today?

[No Response]

Stan: OK.

Aligning CIMI with another Organization

Stan: So, a brief report. The executive committee has discussed whether we should join or align CIMI with... organization. We thought the best approach was to align with an existing SDO. And after further consideration... considered CDISC and IHE and openHealth Tools... We came down to.. the 2 best options were IHTSDO or HL7. And the executive committee took some time to visit with Chuck Jaffe... and Don Sweete... In the end, there was a preference by the executive committee to become a part of IHTSDO.

Stan (cont'd): The executive committee has prepared a statement of how that might happen and how the 2 organizations... might become part of IHTSDO. So that written description went to Don Sweete who shared it with IHTSDO... and talked about what resources would be needed... Some of you have been exposed... discussed what we want to use for tooling and how work with others... Has to do with overhead of hosting websites and other overhead. As we get further along... will hold general CIMI membership meeting to give people the chance to describe their points of interest... etc. I welcome comments and questions relative to that initiative. Any thoughts?

Gerard: 13606... We discussed. We think it is a sensible route to explore.

Harold: The timeframe?

Stan: We hope that... don't know if will be finished, but hope progress to report at the fall IHTSDO in Amsterdam... within 6 weeks.

Tom: What does IHTSDO think they will get out of it?

Stan: It would be those folks who could say. My impression is there is a belief that for SNOMED to be... [difficult to hear]they need to define... terminology between... terminology and uniform models. So having... tightly bound to SNOMED would... decrease barriers in clinical systems.

Thomas: Sounds good. That is what I was talking to them about as a committee member 6 years ago.

Stan: Glad you did not say that.

Thomas: I'm sure all here get the irony.

CIMI Modeling Taskforce Face-to-Face Meeting in Oakland

Stan: OK - Meeting in Oakland. Sarah?

Sarah: We have the location. First 2 days (near?) the new Kaiser Hospital. Third day - near the San Francisco Airport. Third day - a tour of Kaiser Hospital. Kaiser will feed all Monday and Tuesday, we will be on our own on Wednesday. Agenda - I will be glad to help, but... But I don't have notes from the meeting in July. Issues to address - unique opportunity to get some work done.

Harold: Where are we as far as getting Patrick's work into a repository? Can we publish an alpha?

Patrick: Anything - what we showed last time... need consensus on terminology bindings. Models are in good shape. Thomas brought up concerns on test model. But I am waiting.

Harold: We can touch on that today... I am comfortable on AOL-side... But I know Linda had questions about terminology-id.

Linda: Last I heard there were a few outstanding issues on models... Not sure if we came to conclusion on Tom's email.

Harold: Has Patrick done face-to-face?

Linda: Face-to-face gives us the opportunity to do it faster. Has there been progress during the week?

Patrick: I have been helping him on Git Repository...

Thomas: I am trying to get Git to work. The ability to retain a node from any level to be overridden on deeper arbitrary level is working now. Have to get into workbench. Worst case - Patrick and I can work together so can get something to see what should look like. But looks good to me. So - you can specialize generic element node from clinical... at any level... So - specialized once or multiple times...

Linda: Great. Solution to (?) in regards to closing off the node?

Thomas: I am going to implement what you and I agreed on.

Linda: Cardinality?

Thomas: If max occurrence is 1, then straight override. If max unbound, then keep original node and... children... I think hard to... I can implement that and get going and make changes to current archetype. I sent an email with screen shots and cloning of parent node. People will have to look at and... clinical meaning.

Stan: In situation where might want an outcome... - can fix?

Thomas: Yes - a way to override. Closing of parent... Then if you end up with that, you can prohibit by... repeat that node... id... and manual removal.

Linda: (?)

Thomas: Not sure I like that.

Linda: A decent short-term or...

Harold: I will need to understand the ramifications of that in response to AML /AOL because it may violate one of our rules.

Gerard: Thinking about it - will be quite complex... The way our model thinks is a different way... When specialize, change the... of node. Makes specialization easier, I think... Just wanted you to know this.

Action Item - Gerard

Thomas: With respect to your suggestion, I read your email. You need some examples - put them in the repository so we can look at with the tool.

Harold: Can you put something up now?

Gerard: I must look for it... Create examples.

Stan: OK. So, coming back to the agenda for Oakland. I think you can see the screen. Finalize term-binding. Other modeling style issues - so when we look with real content, we can look at discussions. Probably have to do with pre/post coordination. Will be those to talk about. So - style issues...

Linda: I would be impressed if we get terminology binding done before the meeting. Would be good if by the end of the meeting we have lab models ready for alpha publication. Sarah - do we have teleconference facilities?

Sarah: I can...

Stan: And I have voice over-speaker thing...

Sarah: So - the answer is yes.

Stan: So - have the lab models ready for alpha publication. If we run out of other things to do, I would like to discuss how we make examples of instance data in the models, because that is one thing that makes implementations of the model useful...

Linda: And think about proposals.

Stan: InterMountainHealth is working on the creation of FHIR profiles from the models. Don’t know if we want to talk about this at the meeting.

Linda: Worth keeping in mind.

Stan: It has value. Would like to get the group's insight... A lot of issues that come up about FHIR profiles will come up... XML schema... issues about naming and aliases... general issues... Would be useful to discuss...

Thomas: I have most of FHIR in a Reference model... I spoke with Graham... It is interesting to look at in the Ref Model in the tool.

Stan: Terminology-binding issues... How do we signify how to constrain a coded_text field to... a set of coded_text elements in field?

Harold: Not talking about post-coordinated?

Stan: No - composition in a ... field.

Harold: I know we discussed in terms of term-binding... We decided we would postpone until we got one taken care of.

Stan: Maybe we won't want to talk about yet...

Linda: Might want to re-visit.

Harold: OK. Term-binding... I think we have it down to a single... But when open to multiple...

Stan: Other?

Harold: Need to review AML - the way the example models will be represented... To be sure our interpretation matches others...

Linda: Finalize the coded_text. Make sure the Ref Model is finalized.

Stan: Coded_text or ...?

Linda: Coded_text.

Stan: OK.

Specializing identifiers from CIMI patterns in ADL

Harold: Last time - I set out to produce a 2.0.2 trial model which I did. It is in the Repository. I sent out an email. [Harold shows on the Screen]

Harold: So - Ref Model Release 2.0.2. The HTML - up from a server. Pick up the pdf... simplest. So I have been asked to propose 2 things.

Harold (cont'd): The first thing we talked about - How to identify things that aren’t constrained and should be constrained... is_im... infrastructure and is_im.... And I added is_ADL_primitive type. If you find it on one of these types down here, there is a... And... ADL-date-time... How you have described... So I put those in on duration-date-time... date-time. So, you use the... accuracy... value status.

Harold (cont'd): Most important on terminology constraint. Don't constrain anything here... Take the... of the constraint and... The second bit... on coded_text... We removed term_id. In SNOMED - they said you should not expose those. And we added URI... optional string. And I proposed a change to the documentation... So add URI.

[Harold shows last week's email from Linda]

Linda's email of Sept 4, 2014

Here is a summary of the action items I recorded from today's modelling taskforce meeting:

  1. Reference Model 
    • Update CODED_TEXT datatype in UML and resulting BMM
      • Add uri: String attribute (cardinality [0..1] ??)
        • Reasoning: To allow uris to be used to refer to a coded concept in code systems that supports uris.
      • Delete term_id: String attribute
        • Reasoning: This will never be constrained in a CIMI archetype, and will not appear in our example instances. If an implementation requires this, they can add this attribute to the implementation datatype.
    • Distinguish the attributes which will never be archetyped, but are still required for example instances (i.e. "is_im_runtime" attributes)
    • Harold? to update UML with the above, generate a new BMM file and place into GitHub repository.
    • All to ensure that their ADL Workbench is using the reference model from the Github repository.
  2. Terminology Binding
    • Fixed value set constraints: To set value for uri, code, terminology_id and term
    • Value set constraints: To link ac_code with uri for value set
  3. ADL workbench
    • Tom to check how the workbench handles node specialisation - to ensure that a repeatable node that has been specialised once is still available to specialise again in a deeper model specialisation.
    • Patrick to update node ids when this is working

Harold: We need to either manually edit the... or ask Michael to turn the crank or us.