Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Meeting Information


March 22, 2018


10 EDT/9 CDT/8 MDT/7 PDT

Attending: Amy Opalek, chair; Prasad Chodavarapu, editor; Rob Chadwick, Tom Creighton, Kirke Lawton, Purvi Maniar, Brenda Ruff, Bill Sivrais, Valerie Smothers

Agenda Items

1 Review minutes

The minutes were approved.

2 Introduction of Veracity and discussion of program API requirements (see proposal and new requirements page)

Valerie introduced Tom and Rob. Previously both worked for the advanced distributed learning initiative, creators of SCORM and xAPI. They bring a great deal of expertise in developing and documenting APIs. Tom noted that he has experience in documenting APIs and working with community groups such as MedBiquitous. Rob noted that he is a software engineer with experience in JSON development.

Kirke noted that the AAMC is interested in standing up and API to expose basic data about medical schools. Prasad asked if this would be a reference implementation. Kirke replied it could be. Rob agreed that lessons learned from real-world implementations would be important.

Kirk noted that the AAMC would be both a provider and consumer of this service. One use case is providing updates on new schools or changes in names and other details. More data would be exposed to member organizations then to nonmember organizations. Amy noted that FAIMER had a similar requirement. She noted another use case would be incorporating data on the fly and other systems. Kirk noted that some schools would be in both data sets and questioned how to handle that. Crosswalks between identifiers do exist. Amy noted that the FAIMER directory was fine with making the identifier public. Kirke noted that sub entities are a challenge. Amy noted that there are programs and map to more than one institution.

Valerie asked what language Kirk and Amy were most interested in using, XML or JSON. Prasad encouraged the group not to design for a single language or technology. The client can decide. Rob noted that the data models we need to be implementable in both XML and JSON. Kirk noted that new attributes may be added on a regular basis. He doesn’t want to go through the standards development process for every addition. He asked the group to think about what they would put in a public API for starters. He mentioned here founded, versions of the name, accreditation status.

Tom noted in IMS creates an information model without a binding. We may want to have a similar approach. Rob agreed we should specify the data model and gather requirements. Kirk questioned whether we should use JSON LD. Valerie suggested Kirk attend the upcoming technical steering committee meeting.

3 Discussion of FDA REMS requirements and overview of next steps - see requirements

Valerie explained that the FDA has a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy, or REMS, to mitigate the risks posed by opioid medications. Initially this REMS was limited to extended-release medications and CE providers supporting the program would provide aggregate data. The FDA is transitioning to a broader REMS which would include all opioids and collect learner level data on CE participants. The nature of the change requires looking at different standards to fulfill the requirements. Valerie will be speaking to Amy, Prasad, James, who chairs the activity report working group, and Francis Kwakwa, who chairs the metrics working group, to discuss which MedBiquitous standards should be used to fulfill the FDA requirements.

4 Discussion of Education statuses - see also SRS users guide

Valerie noted that at the last call we discussed changing the values of education status and documenting the definitions. Kirk share the attached SRS users guide, which has many definitions at the end. Previously we had discussed creating a hierarchy. Valerie noted that XML did not support hierarchies for enumerated list, but that the hierarchy could be represented in the text of the specification. The group agreed to create a vocabulary of terms and definitions and circulate to the full working group, specifically requesting feedback from nursing and pharmacy. Privy suggested adding education notice in the group agreed.


Action Items

  • Valerie will send Kirk the technical steering committee appointment.
  • The group will create a vocabulary of education status values with definitions and circulate for feedback to all working group members, specifically soliciting feedback from nursing and pharmacy.
  • An education notice element will be added.
  • No labels