2026-06-18 LabMCoP Meeting Notes
Date
Jun 18, 2026
Attendees
Present | Name | Organization |
|---|---|---|
X | Nancy Cornish | CDC |
| Manjula Dharmawardhana | CDC |
X | Riki Merrick | APHL |
X | Christina Gallegos | APHL |
X | Amy Liu | Inductive Health / APHL |
- | Raj Dash | Duke / CAP |
X | John Snyder | Pragmatic Terminologies, LLC |
| Andrea Pitkus | UW |
X | Kathy Walsh | Labcorp |
| Rob Hausam | Hausam Consulting |
| Pam Banning | 3M |
| Elissa Passiment |
|
| Kristina Betz | CDC - NHSN |
| Jake Bunn | CDC |
| Marissa McMeen | CDC |
X | Richard Santiago | FL DOH |
Upcoming OOO |
|
|
Working with DHQP for NHSN reporting | Nancy | Follow up list:
|
Question on Karius Testing | Riki/Christina | FL DPH (and CDPH) have questions about how to best encode reports from Karius (using NextGen Sequencing for a multitude of organisms) - this is a LDT They are currently using:
Discussion:
|
Follow up from AndesVirus codes question | Riki |
Below not discussed today:
|
Call adjourned 12:03 PM EDT |
| BELOW NOT DISCUSSED |
Specimen CMT - Hosting Options | Riki | Any Updates on FU with: Clinical Architecture: They could create conceptMap based on the content model they built, need to follow up about FHIR server usage ONC: Pull up email from Carmela |
Specimen CMT terms | Christina | Review collection method concepts (initiated by USCDI valueset creation: https://hackmd.io/38xa1BZ7TjaPMao6LJHuCA#Proposal ): retired concepts: 24139008 Endoscopy of urinary bladder (procedure) not in procedure hierachy: 258429002 Rectal scrape specimen Using preferred name, not FSN (these should not be an issue in the final version, since FSN or preferred name would be pulled based on the concept code, correct?): 122462000 Drainage procedure only NHSN terms left for questions:
|
CMT Governance process |
|
|
CMT proposed maintenance process |
| Start writing this up on this confluence page: Specimen CMT Update Process Questions from Zulip thread that should be covered by the process we come up with here:
User Guide starter Specimen Cross-Mapping-Table (Specimen CMT) |
Follow up items |
|
|
Lab tests as procedures or orderables | Do we still need this? | Recommendation by SNOMED is that the Observable entity hierarchy be used for both ordering and resulting. As for the technique hierarchy, that in no way is intended to be used for either ordering or resulting laboratory tests. Those concepts are used to model both observables and procedures. SNOMED LOINC extension: https://browser.loincsnomed.org/?perspective=full&conceptId1=363787002&edition=MAIN/LOINC/2025-09-21&release=&languages=en The problem is that major EHR-s vendors have set up CPOE using Procedures for orders to initiate a workflow (that creates the triggering event in the system) - that’s where the push-back comes from. There is a CPT to SNOMED CT mapping (as a paid mapping available from AMA), but no LOINC mapping. Can we reach out to CAP Informatics, ADLM Informatics and ASCLS Informatics to get their take on where Lab tests should live We had said we would work through the Colonoscopy example: Reference links: clinical guidelines: Official journal of the American College of Gastroenterology | ACG Quality Indicators: Official journal of the American College of Gastroenterology | ACG
There is this question in the LOINC Community: https://forum.loinc.org/t/assistance-creating-a-value-set-for-all-loinc-procedure-concepts/2993 it is related to this US Core FHIR Change request: https://jira.hl7.org/browse/FHIR-54415 Answer to this one is that in USCDI Procedure (https://isp.healthit.gov/taxonomy/term/781/uscdi-v6) does not list LOINC as applicable Vocab standard in any verion, so remove it. Often folks think of lab tests as procedures, because they can be ordered in CPOE (and outsidde the US, in the UK for example that’s how folks have modeled those, which is why LOINC was adding more of the high level order codes in 2.81 release, so we still should tackle the LOINC community question. John was working on creatign an intesnional valueset definition based on class + type and maybe a few other attributes |
European Semantic work |
| Link to the German FHIR IG around suceptibility testing: Confluence page: Ask if Rob can keep us updated |
Specimen CMT pilot implementers |
|
|
Specimen CMT - education |
|
|
Specimen CMT - tracking implementation impact
|
|
|
Future projects for this call after CMT |
|
|
Recording:
Please reach out to riki.merrick@aphl.org for access to the recording.
Chat:
11:12:50 From Kathy Walsh - Labcorp : I do not know anything about their testing.
11:44:24 From AmyLiu : Sorry, I have to hop on another call. Thanks
11:53:05 From Richard S. (FL-DOH) : I'll let you all get back to it, thanks so much for all your help with this!
11:53:14 From John Snyder (NLM / US SNOMED NRC) : Reacted to "I'll let you all get..." with 👍
11:58:34 From John Snyder (NLM / US SNOMED NRC) : 120639003 |Hantavirus pulmonary syndrome (disorder)|
Action items
Quick decisions not requiring context or tracking
For quick, smaller decisions that do not require extra context or formal tracking, use the “Add a decision…” function here.
Decisions requiring context or tracking
For decisions that require more context (e.g., documentation of discussion, options considered) and/or tracking, use the decision template to capture more information.