Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Meeting Information

Date:

January 28, 2016

Time:

9 MST/10 CST/11 EST/16 GMT

Attending:  David Topps, Ellen Meiselman, Co-Chairs; Eric Emde, Cindy Franco (from Vanderbilt), Valerie Smothers, and Luke Woodham 

Agenda Items

1 Review minutes

Valerie sent an updated link.  Any corrections or additions can be emailed otherwise, minutes were accepted as submitted. 

2 Announcement of the formation of the Learning Experience Working Group

http://www.medbiq.org/announcing_the_learning_experience_working_group

 Valerie mentioned the Learning Experience Working Group was formally announced on the MedBiquitous home page, newsletter list and also via ANSI standards action on January 1.  Inquiries to join the group are being received and will be discussed later on the call.  She explained other accredited standards organizations may submit a formal proposal in which case the Executive Committee would need to work to harmonize the existing project.  David asked with ANSI formally recognizing the working group, will we move forward with publishing verbs?  Valerie clarified that is part of the approved project; however, there are two days left in the comment period.  

3 Possible involvement of Laerdal, Data Interoperability Standards Consortium

David reached out to Laerdal and mentioned MedBiquitous’ work and suggested membership.  Valerie added that is a requirement for sustainability purposes.  David commented they are anxious to collaborate and share findings at the MedBiq conference in May.  Ellen mentioned DISC (Data Interoperability Standards Consortium) are talking with MedBiquitous about support and alignment. 

Valerie provided background on DISC. ADL put out a broad agenda announcement (BAA) and Rustici software responded. The result is the TinCan API.  ADL decided it should be shepherded by an accredited standard development organization and partnered with IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers).  Aaron Silvers managed the IEEE standards committee. They decided that IEEE was not a good fit due to business model constraints, so the specification is being moved to DISC.  Valerie was unclear if it’s a consortium of organizations but recommended speaking with them further.  Erick advised using caution and to make sure working with one standards developer does not preclude working with another.  Valerie expressed concern over intellectual property aspects.  David mentioned when the DOD funds something they retain intellectual property.  

4 Poster session proposal for AAMC Information Technology in Academic Medicine Conference in Toronto

David mentioned the AAMC Group on Information Resources has a series of meetings around North America and they have chosen Toronto as the meeting site in September 2016.  They decided to submit an abstract for a poster session to draw interest.  Ellen volunteered to assist David with the poster.  

5 Update on Virtual Patient profile

Discussion of Verbs and Activity groups we have outlined so far

Working document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZN7-VEcbILq0pi9a50nyZBW5FgzITVbeFoYtMS2McJo/edit?usp=sharing

David commented there were no further changes on the working document since the last meeting.   Valerie has set up formal information on the MedBiquitous website.  Ellen mentioned if DISC methods makes handling profiles easier, she would consider it.  Valerie agreed.  Valerie is setting up a meeting with Ellen, David and DISC group to clarify issues.  Ellen suggested possibly talking to others involved. 

David explained there were two new verbs, “ignored” and “arrived” that relate to broader groups called recipe sets.  The original focus was on Virtual Patients; however, the Executive Committee asked the working group to broaden their scope to other forms of simulation.  Ellen clarified a recipe is whatever is relevant to that activity and may include more than just verbs.  David mentioned the goal is to harmonize verbs across different profiles.  The working notes are an attempt to describe how things differ.  

6 Discussion of statements built using our VP profile for a test example: "Examination of the Infant"

Possible missing verbs
Context - recommendations
Duration, Timestamp

Ellen has attempted to use the document to write simplistic xAPI statement examples and requested help and suggestions to determine reporting and activity types.  She created a power point with an examination of an infant as an example. 

David commented that he hasn’t found “clicked” useful in Virtual patients as it can mean different things depending on the context (test question, video pause, node selection). He explained that in Open Labyrinth if someone is interested in an action they click on it and are sent to a new node.  When they arrive at that node something happens; they have redirect rules depending on the action.  Ellen questioned the use of time stamp and duration.  David commented for their purposes LRS in XAPI time stamps every statement that gets registered.  In certain circumstances it is not done in real time and will not be accurate.  

7 Open Discussion

David asked Valerie about the ANSI process.  Valerie explained you have five years to develop standard and you can implement early versions of the specification.  The specification profile may change due to the standards development process.   David raised concern about the expanded scope.   Valerie assured David the charter approved by the Executive Committee is clear and specific to xAPI  Ellen supported working on the Virtual Patient profile first and then working on others.   

Next Steps: Valerie will organize the build out.  She suggested developing a template for all profiles.  Valerie and Ellen will work on that, with David joining when able.  David will set up Open Labyrinth accounts for Ellen, Valerie and Erick.    

Decisions

Action Items

  • No labels