Umberto, We'd really appreciate something published by the PCORNet privacy task force. Do you have a pointer to minutes of some meeting where they decided on +/-30 days?
p.s. This discussion has pretty clearly moved on from review of the minutes. Everybody, remember to change the subject header when you change the subject of a message. -- Dan ________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] on behalf of Tom Mish [[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2014 7:48 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [Gpc-dev] Fwd: Re: minutes gpc-dev 11 March 2014 for review -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Gpc-dev] minutes gpc-dev 11 March 2014 for review Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 16:13:09 -0500 From: Umberto Tachinardi <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]> To: Thomas F Mish <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>, Wilson Nathan <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]> [...] Stick to: +/- 30 days. [...] Umberto -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Gpc-dev] minutes gpc-dev 11 March 2014 for review Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 19:37:31 +0000 From: Phillip Reeder <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]> To: Thomas F Mish <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>, "[email protected]"<mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]> Tom/Umberto, Regarding the +/-30 days, is there any documentation that states that de-identifying dates with that offset is acceptable from a HIPAA perspective? That is what I think we are looking for as 365 seems to be the currently accepted standard for date shifting. Phillip On 3/11/14 1:54 PM, "Thomas F Mish" <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]> wrote: >Sorry I couldn't make the phone call everyone. Two quick notes... > >* When I talked with Umberto before heading down for the hackathon, he >reported the +/- 30 days was the standard. >* I think there are more than one Nathan's in the group, can we add a >last initial or a location to gain a bit more specificity when referring >to our plethora of Nathans? ;-) > >-Tom Mish > > > >On 3/11/2014 12:25 PM, Dan Connolly wrote: >> Nathan to see that Umberto solicits advice from the PCORNet privacy TF > >_______________________________________________ >Gpc-dev mailing list >[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> >http://listserv.kumc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gpc-dev ________________________________ UT Southwestern Medical Center The future of medicine, today.
_______________________________________________ Gpc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://listserv.kumc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gpc-dev
