Page Comparison

Reviewing minutes from the last call - Action Item Follow up

• Pull out the definitions from LIVD for test kit and equipment and put here: SHIELD Glossary

  • Review operational definition of “equivalence”

• Outreach to Dr. DeBaca

  • Hung will check for more info and maybe see, if she could participate in SHIELD

• Keep updating the googlesheet: Potassium LIVD data

• Shared Reportable Conditions LIVD google sheet for crowdsourcing with CSTE - added sign up sheet for PHAs to specific conditions and see how that develops

• Have LIVD File Repository Requirements

  Have draft budget (for setting up a web-based database and yearly maintenance): https://aphlinformatics.atlassian.net/wiki/download/attachments/915407143/LIDR - Budget.xlsx?api=v2

• Review LIDR Use Cases and sign up to lead one of these - prioritize these use cases, so that we can finalize the requirements for the first phase of LIDR

• Define next steps to migrate existing LIVD files into FHIR LIVD catalog format and find a FHIR server to host

• Marti can share the LIDR categorical data to instance data mapping for each element - DATE?

Call Schedule

send OOO via chat or email

 LIDR White Paper Review

Reviewing the comments on the LIDR White Paper = LIDR White Paper

Pick up at Requirement #10:

• 10+ UDI’s - when would that be the case?

  • create a system UDI that describes the process and combines all the components

  • UDI at component level for some

  • no need to support a speciif number

• Delete “There should be a description of how UDIs are collected, stored, and transmitted.” - this is needed as educational material for implementation - if not here, where do we keep this information? - Make a parking lot item where should this live - maybe the Crossproduct ? Has to be adreesed for lab workflow etc

• Remove “Need LIS functionality for easy use of UDIs to reduce manual labor, typos, and errors of hand entry, etc. This should include the use of barcodes for entry into databases (LIS, LIDR, etc.)” - this falls into the same implementaiton guidance / needs to make this happen in real world data

• Is the intent to include UDI in all results going back to provider?

  • idea is that yes - we need to include it in the record as part of the test build

  • that is a lot of data and it will be hard to get that into the LIS for panel tests that can have multiple UDIs

  • assumption that no EHR-s and LIS can support this today - this is what we would like to see

  • the LIS and EHR-s cannot do anything with the information, when it gets too big

  • it would be best to have a single UDI to combine the compoents into the process - this should be coming from the vendors - in LIDR we should support the highest granularity - in the instance data this could/should be only using the combination UDI

• #11

  • Reviewing the requirements - htey may be too speicfic to an implementation

  • if a vendor notifies the lab - is the lab expected to notifying ordering providers / PH

    • tis would be handled the same way as versioning - this would not be retroactive, correct in system and send out going forward

    • also hopefully vendors would notify LIDR and then LIDR can push this information out to all the labs

  • supporting onboarding of labs to use LIDR contnet

  • QA testing will include testing for use of this data - similar to proficiency testing

Start with 12.b on 9/9/2024

ACTION ITEMS

Please see the action items at top of this page - Next deliverable is White paper draft by end of this month!!!

Next call

No call 9/2/2024 - Happy Labor Day!

Monday 9/9/2024 9:05 - 9:55 AM ET

Adjourned

9:54 AM ET