Yes, please do take ownership of the diagnosis modifier ticket (#90<https://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/ticket/90>) and medication modifiers ticket (#199<https://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/ticket/199>); I'm sure Laurel and Alex won't mind you taking work off their plates. Be sure to point to exactly which file on central desktop contains your proposal.
As to closing them, the norm/plan is to have the vocabulary loaded on babel as well so that others can browse around. Would you like Nathan or me to set you up with an account to do that? Otherwise, assign the ticket to one of us and we'll upload to babel. A ticket doesn't have to be closed to get on the agenda. Substantive progress can do that too. Or you could try closing without a copy on babel, presuming that the downstream stuff will more or less take care of itself. (But I can almost guarantee that Nathan or I won't get around to something without a ticket assigned to us.) On freezing... I neglected to give the short version of the current process: if a ticket has been closed for a week or two, it's agreed by the group. Then it gets more frozen as sites deploy it, since we gain confidence through the experience and the cost of changing increases. I can't think of any useful improvements on that, but I'm open to suggestions. -- Dan ________________________________ From: Phillip Reeder [[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2014 5:09 PM To: Dan Connolly; [email protected] Subject: Re: approving GPC terminologies: data-domains2 and group decision making Regarding “How do you know when something is Final?”, Final doesn’t have to be set in stone, because there is always new information that can come along, but we can consider something final and freeze it, allowing for sites to take it and start implementing it. That’s the finalized I’m looking for. We already know we will have a next version of the terminology with additional data domains, and changes. So, with regard to diagnoses and medication modifiers, I have uploaded a slight modification of the diagnosis modifiers terminology to central desktop. It also includes the medication modifiers I had previously proposed. Medication modifiers are mostly just source of data modifiers. To get these accepted as the Final GPC Terminology V1 modifiers for demographics and medications, should I take ownership of the diagnoses modifier terminology ticket and medication modifier terminology ticket and close them, which should move them to the agenda for next week? There are a bunch of terminologies on Central Desktop. Maybe we should add a GPC V1 Terminology folder where we can put the approved terminologies? The January 15th date for the milestone:data-domains2<https://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/milestone/data-domains2> is going to be here before we know it, especially with the holidays coming up. Phillip From: Dan Connolly <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Thursday, December 11, 2014 at 1:33 PM To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: approving GPC terminologies: data-domains2 and group decision making In the Dec 9 notes<http://listserv.kumc.edu/pipermail/gpc-dev/2014q4/000925.html>, I see some questions about the process of approving terminology. It's somewhat evolving, but a week or two I collected my notes in milestone:data-domains2<https://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/milestone/data-domains2>: As discussed Oct 28 (notes: #12<https://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/ticket/12>) priority domains for this milestone are: * GPC Demographics #67<https://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/ticket/67> * GPC Diagnoses #63<https://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/ticket/63> * GPC Vitals #23<https://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/ticket/23> * GPC Meds. #78<https://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/ticket/78> * Cancer Tumor Registry #185<https://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/ticket/185> In each case, the goals are to: * agree on design, including * which clinical workflows the data comes from * ETL details such as Epic clarity tables or NAACCR ETL scripts * deliver metadata in i2b2 * as .csv via cdt for sites to use (#76<https://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/ticket/76>) * on babel for browsing (#1<https://informatics.gpcnetwork.org/trac/Project/ticket/1>) Regarding "How do you know when something is final?" it can only be final when there is no possibility that new information will arise that merits revising the design. There's a risk of doing work based on a design that changes, but also, as noted on the call, there's an incentive to get involved early. (cf The Economic Importance of Standards<http://www.w3.org/2005/Talks/0518-stds-tbl/> by Tim Berners-Lee). Regarding "If a ticket is being closed - item is approved and that was the standard" that's close, but let me clarify: the owner of a ticket is to close the ticket when they believe they have completed the task. The reporter (aka customer) of the ticket gets notification that the ticket was closed and reopens if if they're not satisfied. Anyone who doesn't agree can reopen the ticket. Closing a ticket doesn't imply agreement by gpc-dev as a whole, though. It puts the ticket on the agenda of the next teleconference. Typically, the ticket is closed in a way that doesn't merit discussion, and it's just cited under "review of agenda". Anyone who thinks a ticket merits discussion can say so. Otherwise, once the call concludes, the group has agreed to the agenda. And once the notes have been out for the better part of the week and the "any comments on last week's notes?" question in the following teleconference gets no reply, then the group has agreed and everyone is party to the decision to close the ticket. It's still possible to re-open the ticket even after the group has agreed, provided there's new information that the group didn't consider when they made the decision. (That is: just coming along later and saying "I wasn't paying attention when that ticket got closed; I really think one of these other options that you considered is the right one" isn't cool.) I hope this explanation addresses the need for... Laurel will create a ticket for the process of approving terminology; will hand it off to Philip -- Dan ________________________________ UT Southwestern Medical Center The future of medicine, today.
_______________________________________________ Gpc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://listserv.kumc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gpc-dev
