July 27, 2016
8 PDT/9 MDT/10 CDT/11 EDT/16 BST/17 CEST/23 SGT
Attending: Tim Willett, Co-Chair; Sacha Cohen, Susan Hollar, Kevin Krane, Paul Schilling, Valerie Smothers
1 Review minutes
Tim provided a brief overview of the prior meeting minutes. Valerie updated the competency framework draft to include XML examples and descriptions. She will provide an IMS update later in the meeting. Kevin moved the minutes be accepted. The minutes were accepted as submitted.
Tim asked the group to briefly review the document. Kevin suggested clarifying the term “portable data.” After further discussion the paragraph was changed to indicate that standards “make it possible to compile, compare, aggregate, exchange, and transfer data.” Tim suggested adding a phrase to clarify that all examples are related to short-order cook.
Tim requested an introductory sentence about the operational definitions used when developing standards and in particular by this working group. Connie Bowe’s definitions for EPA’s and milestones were used. Valerie will follow-up with Connie to confirm references. Tim questioned whether the Performance Framework definition was inclusive of milestones. Valerie suggested specifying “the ACGME milestones are examples of Performance Frameworks.” She will also follow-up with Connie on the EPA definitions.
Tim suggested changing the order so that the short order cook EPAs follow the Competency Framework and the Performance Framework and come immediately before levels of entrustment. Valerie mentioned a few changes made as a result of the last call resulted in a change in the numbering. The group made additional minor edits. Tim also suggested specifying from where the Performance Level labels were derived and that the specification does not require using labels.
Under Levels of Entrustment, Valerie removed subset of document that illustrated what levels of entrustment would look like for one of the examples of EPAs. Valerie will reference the article provided by Steve Lieberman to clarify use of labels.
Under Competency Objects, Tim suggested including a narrative on how these are technically represented, and the same with Performance Level and EPAs. Tim noted the potential challenge is for someone not technically inclined to figure out the human readable and translate it into XML; the narrative mapping will be helpful. Valerie will add competency object.
Tim asked Valerie what the plan is for circulating and promoting the document. She responded media channels will be used to promote, as well asking key individuals to help promote, and posting on the MedBiq website. She added the XML is already on the website, but not easily found. She will include it in the next newsletter. Tim requested she recognize all those in the working group who made valuable contributions to the document unless they prefer otherwise they should notify Valerie. Valerie suggested the group consider including MedBiq copyright and license as in the specification.
3 Update on IMS discussion
Valerie noted that she and Johmarx contacted Mark Leuba in June regarding the MedBiq standards already developed; Johmarx also followed up with a note. Mark sent them a note back agreeing that collaboration made sense but the timing wasn’t ideal. He mentioned IMS was holding a milestones meeting in August and if they hit their target they could start talking about collaboration afterwards. Valerie replied that the further IMS gets in development, the less meaningful any collaboration will be. Valerie noted that in health care we have agreement on common competencies used across organizations. That has allowed us to proceed in ways IMS has not been able to. Tim emphasized our priority is to insure our specifications meet the needs of our community.
The next call will focus on making final edits to the document and providing next steps for guidelines.
Valerie will revise the competency illustration as follows:
- Clarify the references supporting the definitions of EPAs and milestones with Connie
- Reference the article provided by Steve Lieberman to clarify the use of labels for levels of entrustment
- Briefly describe the technical representation of performance levels, EPAs, and entrustment levels
- Include working group member names, copyright, and license