2010-02-18

Meeting Information

Attending: Rachel Ellaway, Co-chair; Valerie Smothers, Staff; Susan Albright, Jörn Heid, Dan Walker, Luke Woodham

Agenda Items

1 Review minutes of last meeting

The minutes were approved.

Rachel asked Valerie to summarize the current status of the specification within the ANSI process. Valerie replied that the specification is in ballot within the standards committee until February 25. We should have an ANSI approved standard by the April meeting. ANSI examines our results to ensure that we followed our procedures.

2 Review profiling effort

Branching 

JB and Rachel have spent time discussing the branching profile and have another meeting scheduled for February 19. They will present the results on the next call.

Global 

Dan commented that he and Luke corresponded about the global profile. He added that he will be going on paternity leave soon and is hoping wrap up in the next couple of weeks.

Luke added they've had a look to see where the parallels are likely. It looks like it may be feasible. There are significant differences that would require human intervention. The Navigation models are similar, but the use of counters is different. VPD elements vary slightly. He imagines there is a way to translate between the two. It's unclear how effective that would be.

Dan added that there are some things that may not make sense pedagogically when translating from one to the other. For example, PIVOTE has the learner evaluate whether the parking was good or bad.

Rachel commented that none of these profiles are mandatory. Right now the group is looking to see whether they will help. If it's not helpful, we don't have to create it.

Valerie commented that the goal of profiles is allowing the virtual patient user to know that they can take cases from one system and import and use them in another without having to do too much work. Some editing is ok. The question is how much of the content is dependent on the system context.

Linear

Jörn commented that he managed to import a web sp linear case. There are no rules or counters. Valerie asked if Jörn had created a schema for the linear profile. Jörn commented that although current linear systems do not have counters, it may be that in the future they do have counters. Therefore he was reluctant to omit counters form a linear profile.

Valerie asked what would distinguish the linear profile. Dan commented it should be based on the activity model and the method of navigation.

Rachel commented that the group can continue to develop profiles after the standard has been released. But we don't have to keep on meeting indefinitely. Some groups go dormant, others take on new work.

Jörn commented that there are several points the group can address after finishing the spec. There will be a version 1.1 of the specification. And it would be nice to develop some tools. Test tool and a logging API would help people developing new systems for the spec.

Valerie commented that MedBiquitous is obligated to maintain the standard on a 5 year cycle. So within 5 years, we need a new version or we need to reaffirm the existing version.

Rachel commented that we should keep the ANSI process as a standing agenda item. The implications of Jörn's proposals warrant further discussion.

3 Activity at ICVP/Medbiq 2010

There will be a virtual patient working group lunch April 27^th at the London meeting. Peter will encourage the audience to attend in his speech.

4 Open discussion

Rachel asked for an update on the certification process. Valerie replied that she could not develop the certification process until the standard and the profiles were final. The current certification plans have profiles playing an integral part.

Luke commented that they have not made a lot of progress related to the virtual world profile. He can't see how Ariadne can map to Pivote.

Rachel commented that Ariadne takes activity nodes and appends second life content. But the way second life references objects is totally non standard. We can observe similarities and make a best practice guide.

Luke -commented that probably the best we can do is document usage of mvp and put example of case up that is available for people to see. He will talk to Dan about the global profile as well. Rachel agreed that was suitable.

Susan commented that she is doing poster at NEGEA together with JB, Nancy Posel, and Marc Triola. Nancy called one of the versions exploratory - she thinks it is same thing as global.

Rachel commented that they have had discussions with Molson about participation, but they've not fully engaged. There is no obligation to use the MedBiquitous specification or terminology. But if it is represented as MedBiquitous, it should use our terminology. She recommended that Susan speak to Nancy to clarify.

Dan asked Jörn if he thought a call with casus and web sp and tufts would be appropriate? Luke commented he would be happy to participate. Jörn agreed. Jorn recommended a call for all that Dan had mentioned and subsequent calls should it be necessary.  
The next call is March 25 at 11 est, 3 gmt.

Decisions

Action Items

Working group members will continue to develop profiles.