2024-02-20 Steering Committee Meeting Notes
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Attendees
(bolded names indicate attendance)
Stakeholder group | SHIELD organization | Name of SHIELD member | organization designation |
|
Industry Entity | Labgnostic, Inc. | Steve Box | primary |
|
| Andy Harris | alternate |
| |
Epic | Dan Rutz | primary |
| |
|
| alternate |
| |
Biomerieux | Xavier Gansel |
| primary | |
|
| alternate |
| |
Roche | Nick Decker | primary |
| |
Roche | Yue Jin | alternate |
| |
Healthcare Provider | Indiana University/Indiana University Health/Association for Molecular Pathology | Mehdi Nassiri, MD | primary |
|
University of Wisconsin-Madison | Andrea Pitkus, PhD, MLS(ASCP)CM, FAMIA | primary |
| |
UT Southwestern Medical Center | Hung Luu | primary |
| |
UNMC | Scott Campbell | primary |
| |
Tufts Medical Center | Nanguneri Nirmala | primary |
| |
Sonic Healthcare | Eric Crugnale | primary |
| |
Former Quest Diagnostics | Collom, Craig D | primary |
| |
Patient Advocate |
| Stacy Lange | individual |
|
Standards Organization | SNOMED International
| James T. Case | primary |
|
Monica Harry | alternate |
| ||
Regenstrief Institute
| Marjorie Rallins | primary |
| |
Eza Hafeza | alternate |
| ||
HL7
| Julia Skapik | primary |
| |
| alternate |
| ||
Professional Organization | Association of Public Health Laboratories
| Riki Merrick | primary |
|
Dari Shirazi | alternate |
| ||
Graphite Health
| Stan Huff | primary |
| |
| alternate |
| ||
CAP
| Raj Dash | primary |
| |
| alternate |
| ||
AMP
| Robyn Temple | primary |
| |
| alternate |
| ||
Governmental - non Voting | CMS | OPEN | primary |
|
| alternate |
| ||
ONC | Sara Armson | primary |
| |
| alternate |
| ||
CDC | Hubert Vesper (/DDNID/NCEH/DLS) | primary |
| |
Jasmine Chaitram | alternate |
| ||
NLM | John Snyder | primary |
| |
| alternate |
| ||
FDA | Keith Campbell | primary |
| |
Victoria Derbyshire | alternate |
|
Agenda and Notes
em | Notes |
---|---|
Quorum evaluation (two-thirds (2/3) of the Voting Representatives shall be necessary to constitute a quorum for the transaction of business) | Currently we have 19 named members, so 2/3 = 12 (excluding chair and government members).
|
Open Meeting | Started 12:09 PM, quorum reached at: 12:42 PM |
Follow up Items |
|
Presentations etc |
|
Review Working Groups progress | Setting milestones for deliverables should be NEXT for WGs: they will be captured here: SHIELD WG Deliverables and Milestone Grid
|
Feedback on ONC published artifact - do we want to compile as SHIELD, or just as members? |
Discussion: There is quite a bit of push back on this data element Should support testkit and instrument device identifiers, in order to accommodate different patterns provide a way to be able to use data generated as part of regular care for FDA regulatory AND OTHER secondary uses mitigate infrastructure gaps - certification for LIS does not exist at the moment, so missing central player in the ecosystem also see updates on Unique Testkit Device Identifier DI part of the UDI is a synomym of manufacturer and model - GUUID Manufacturers have a lot of work to maintain the UDI for FDA - was a 3 year project to get this organized - don't really want to do something else / in addition Proposed comment: Drop “unique” from the name Could we make a LOINC for things that would not have unique identifiers - like LDTs?
Should support implementation of IHE LAW = CLSI-AUTO-16, which includes transmission of device ID form the instrument to LIS - LIS needs to be able to retian and share those! What would need to happen to include LIS under ONC certification to over gaps?
SInce we are dealing with different perspectives in the industry in this group providing feedback on this tight a timeline might not be the best approach Riki will email a proposed statement to the Steering COmmittee and ask, if we should bring this up on the ALL SHIELD call next week or vote via email, since comments are due March 4. |
Roadmap section updates in response to ONC comments on the SHIELD roadmap | NOT DISCUSSED:
From last SC call: Nick will connect with Sara to get more context and then bring this to the IVD datahub group - then Nick will bring back here
Update from Standards and Vocab WG about re-write of this section?
Identify components that could improve the ecosystem infrastructure, and then highlight the places where these components can be advanced / sustained or made easier to implement. Would SHIELD be willing to consider to provide an exampel implementation - create the structures and bound terminologies to showcase how each element would be properly represented be working. Looking for volunteer to tackle this re-write: For each of the Consideration sections we could certainly add a section on feasibility / requirements (e.g. continued funding for LIDR, better describing the intended use of ANY data element added, overall goal of LIDR, clearly delineate what is commonly used and is minimum, provide best practice and alternatives (non-preferred) - example would be metadata around the value sets in VSAC (curation / usage etc) to be able to ascertain quality) and highlight that other mechanisms are needed to achieve for adoption. |
Next calls | All SHIELD: General Updates: February 27, 2024 Special Topic: March 12, 2024 - State of Interoperability in the UK SC: March 5, 2024 |
Adjourned |
|
From Chat:
Riki Merrick 12:06 PM
Rajesh Dash to Everyone 12:17 PM
Administrative Sex
Race
Interpretation Codes
Observation Result Status Codes Interpretation
Result Status
Value Type
Specimen Type
Specimen Reject Reason
Specimen Condition
Relevant Clinical Information
Device Type
LOINC
SNOMED CT
UCUM
Daniel Rutz 12:27 PM
I would like to ensure that the best possible identifier is always used, in a fall-through order if needed. UDI, GTIN, then whatever else
Xavier Gansel 12:30 PM
from a manufacturer perspective, those unique ID exist
what does not, and needs some efforts, is how to transmit them with the test results to the LIS (i.e. IHE LAW / AUTO16) AND the LIS / EHR to keep track of them
LDT is out of manufacturer scope
Robyn Temple-Smolkin (AMP) to Everyone 12:32 PM
Out of SHIELD scope
Rajesh Dash to Everyone 12:33 PM
Lab interoperability is out of SHIELD's scope?
Robyn Temple-Smolkin (AMP) 12:34 PM
Interoperability, yes of course in scope.
Julia Skapik 12:46 PM
Give me 3 min
Julia Skapik to Everyone 12:48 PM
I'm outside and ready
Hubert 12:57 PM
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.