Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Meeting Information


October 21, 2010



Please note: the conferencing service will ask you to enter the pound sign. Press # for pound.
To mute, press *6.

Attending: Francis Kwakwa, chair;  Ed Kennedy, Valerie Smothers, Jack Kues, Sean Hayes, Andy Rabin

Agenda Items

1 Review minutes of last meeting

The minutes were approved.

2 Report developments related to the institute for evaluation and outcome studies

Jack reported that a number of people met in Baltimore at the task force meeting. The Alliance for CME has stepped up and offered to play a more active role as institute moves forward. They will provide whatever logistic support they can reasonably provide. They don’t want to own the Institute, but they want to help get it moving. There was no opposition voiced, but some did indicate we could add more organizations to the table, including groups representing pharmacy and nursing. Jack is hoping to get participation from ACPE and nursing groups. Jack will draw up something more specific in terms of a steering committee to decide next steps. The group suggested it would be important to get some seed money to keep the infrastructure going, over and above specific project dollars, potentially from a foundation or pharma. There are a couple of projects on the table, particularly with SACME. He met with Moss Blackmon, who represents SACME. They are seeking funding from pharma to move research further along in conjunction with NIQIE. They are looking at the possibility of consolidating what they are doing. There is a wider initiative sponsored by SACME, the Alliance, ACCME, and those involved in the Mayo Conference, which was to push ahead a research agenda. Moss has been tasked with moving forward. We will see if that can be rolled into the institute, and then approach pharma.

Jack and Moss will work together. Moss’s concern with everything running out of sacme is the term of office. That is why he approached NIQIE. So this may be an amalgam of several efforts.

Francis commented there is a lot of interest. Jack commented the discussion has been happening for a while with no movement. It may be time to bring that all together and have something that will result in some action. Having support from the Alliance is important, too. W may have enough steam to bring about something concrete.

Sean commented he shared the concept with some key stakeholders in Canada and Europe, and there was keen interest. Extending to stakeholders in other countries could be an important part of phase 2. Jack replied he would support that. Once it has more substance, the direction is up to who wants to play and do some work.  Sean agreed. He added that many groups outside of the US are looking at composite funding sources, so additional sources of funding could be made available.

3 Discuss approaches to implementation support: implementers pageand mailing list

Valerie commented that the metrics working group could have a page listing implementers as well as a mailing list to support those with implementation questions. She references the list and page created by the Activity Report working group as an example.

Sean agreed that there was value in capturing data from implementers. He compared it to formative assessment data. Whenever you implement a new technology, you want to be aware of experience and learnings from others. Not actual competence or performance, but challenges and benefits could be helpful.

Valerie commented that in addition to CECity, Linda’s group had piloted use of the standard, so there may be good lessons learned there.

Francis added that at RSNA, they had meeting with Valerie to discuss. Kim, who would lead the effort,  has been out on maternity leave, and came in last Friday. She is willing to take the next step. We could set up a call involving Kim, IT staff, and Valerie. Valerie agreed to follow up with Francis.

Valerie questioned whether the group had enough data for a case study. Sean commented that a structured formative assessment sheet for users to comment on would be helpful. Also, that might make it easier to process the data. He asked if there are key questions vis avis integration of standard. Valerie commented that there were and agreed to start working on a draft for the group to review.

Sean asked whether the group planned to submit an abstract or poster on formative learning to an appropriate group such as the Alliance. The more we can communicate the better.

Francis replied that  Kim should be able to work with us to turn in something.  Sean and Andy added they would be happy to help.

Valerie agreed a variety of perspectives would be important.

Andy replied that he would have to look at how all his clients use the features. Their implementation is flexible but compliant.

4 Discussion of case study, CECity

Andy commented that their primary use of the standard is  around PARS reporting. When they implement integration with other systems, that is usually on a transaction basis and uses the activity report standard. When organizations want data dumps, they don’t want metrics report, usually due to technology limitations on their end. He could contribute around pars reporting.

At one point they had talked with Jack about opportunities, but nothing came to fruition. When they connect to other systems, they get data in real time. All of their integrations build around healthcare lom and activity report. Metrics is more of a reporting standard.

Jack commented that the more we can find opportunities to push forward, the better.

Valerie commented that when the Institute for Outcomes and Evaluation is running, that would provide new opportunities.

Jack agreed. Sean added that we need to interpret and apply when we have it, using it to take cme to a higher level.

Francis asked if the institute will have a formal educational component?

Jack replied it would.  Many things need to be integrated. As we put out tools/standards out, we need sufficient education to understand and use them. People need something out of it for them. A certain amount of education needs to go with it. We need to step back and look strategically and integrate the  little pieces.

Sean added that opportunities for aggregate or cross findings have been talked about. But no one has been positioned to do that. Aces and other collaborations have not been able to look across events. That’s a critical outcome of the activity and a key value of the standard.

Francis asked Ed about the usage of PARS.

Ed replied that so far they have collected 12,000 activity records. They’ve only seen providers testing the xml upload feature. There have been no official activities done using the XML format. He asked Andy if they were getting requests to implement xml reporting.

Andy replied that they have interest, and they have documentation of how to set up the system for xml reports. He doesn’t know if anyone is using it. He will check into that. Their goal is to have clients use it without intervention. Andy agreed to send an update to the group.

Ed commented that he is hoping this is fairly early in the system’s life for providers to have ramped up resources for file creation. Over course of next 6 months, they may see an uptake.

Andy asked if the ACCME has said anything about adoption.

Ed replied that they have presented it from their website, but there has not been a lot of active promotion. They do not have the staff resources to work with providers. A few have had questions, but there has been limited feedback. He’s had 2 calls related to the XML upload. Once educators see need to involve it, that loses them. He does want to have people engaged. Manual data entry is cumbersome; text upload is problematic with larger data sets.

Valerie offered to contact Todd Dorman to see if there is interest in implementing at Johns Hopkins.

5 Open discussion

Valerie will ask Jody to schedule a call for the beginning of December. 


Action Items

  • Valerie will work with Francis to set up a call with RSNA staff.
  • Valerie will draft a formative assessment for standards implementers
  • The group will work to submit an abstract to the alliance.
  • Andy will send an update to the group on client use of PARS XML upload.
  • Valerie will contact Todd Dorman to see if he is interested in implementing an XML upload.
  • No labels