Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Meeting Information

Date:

December 17, 2015

Participant code

6765592

Attending: Ellen Meiselman, David Topps, Co-Chairs; Tom Creighton, Erick Emde, Lucas Huang, Valerie Smothers and Luke Woodham.  

Agenda Items

1 Review minutes

The minutes were accepted as submitted.

2 Review or confirmation of approach (note - recorded in Development Principles):

  • Develop medical education/development-relevant profiles with the goal of publishing them on broadly accepted sites such as Tincan Registry and ADL registry - once it is available.
  • For now, we will Google Docs for authoring and revisions, since neither registry is likely to have collaborative tools for authoring profiles.
  • Each profile will be specific to a type of activity, such as virtual patient, mannequins, clinical training.
  • Our first profile is still the Virtual Patient profile we were already working on, because it is relatively easy to define the verbs.  
  • We will keep the scope of the first profile fairly limited, and later evaluate if we want to add notes on how to use the context-activities or results sections of statements to reference competencies.
  • Profiles will contain contextual notes regarding verbs used (ie what initialized means in the context of a virtual patient activity)
  • Profiles will have IRIs. The statement context will point to the IRI of the profile to clarify verb meaning.
  • We¹ll define verbs, when new verbs are necessary, in a manner to be used across multiple profiles.

Ellen provided a background on the profiles the group intends to develop that will inform how to design statements for specific activities. 

David clarified the decision was made to create separate profiles using MedBiq Virtual Patient as the starting point.  Once the mechanism is in place it will be easier to do other profiles.  Ellen clarified they are using a combination of verbs that fit but some may need to be redefined to be relevant to the activity.  David added there may be differences in the context of the verb that could be addressed by a scope note with links back to the original definitions.  Ellen mentioned there may be a few cases where a new verb will need defined, but most of our requirements can be met with scope notes.  David commented there were only three verbs they couldn’t find adequate definitions for, Arrived, Ignored and Updated.  Jason explained that the ADL verb registry will make verbs linkable to semantics tools like SPARQL.  If the group is happy with current definitions and scope notes, he will send to Jason to load into ADL repository.  Valerie recommended waiting until the working group was formally launched following the announcement to the ANSI community.  David was happy to wait to follow proper ANSI protocol.  

3 Discussion of the submission to ANSI

Valerie provided a brief overview of ANSI requirements to formally announce new Standards Development projects.  The Executive Committee voted to approve the new standards project at their last meeting.  A notice will be sent to ANSI announcing the project.  Valerie noted she has never received comment requiring harmonization.  ANSI expects project to progress within a limited amount of time.  Details of the process can be found on our Standards Committee documents.  The important thing is to explain the project accurately and identify the stakeholders and the scope properly.  The  working group should represented by all stakeholders involved.  Ellen question the length of time the process takes.  Valerie explained it takes a few weeks for ANSI to make the announcement in the Standards Registry and then allow for a 30 day comment period.  

4 Verb process updates

Finding or creating new Verbs or Profiles

Verb working definitions

David mentioned the first verb requirement not yet addressed within the VP profile was Arrived.  In a Virtual Patient, a user clicks on link that sends them to a page. If the page that is the intended destination has a conditional rule, the user may be redirected to another page without experiencing the content/activity on the page they intended to visit.   

The second verb requirement not yet addressed is Ignored, when the user did not act on new information.  It isn’t necessarily a bad thing and may be normal depending on the circumstances. 

The third unmet verb requirement, Updated, may occur when the actor is the player engine. For example, the player engine may change a user’s score based on a rule.  The system responds to something the user has done.  Ellen asked if the player is in the context statement. David concurred. 

Valerie asked if these three verbs are seen in other profiles other than VP.  David confirmed the same verbs can be used on other profiles on standardized patients.  

Valerie questioned whether the descriptions should be more generic, adding columns for scope notes to clarify different contexts.  David thought that was possible but it may be easier to keep four different profiles and refer back to the IRI.  Ellen agreed with keeping the same structure.  Valerie asked if verbs were specifically profiled.  David noted in his experience with commonly used verbs, the descriptions are quite different but mean the same thing at the root. 

Valerie asked if links were going to be VP specific.  David noted the schema definitions were from activity stream and Jason wasn’t comfortable with it.  Valerie suggested referencing those definitions in the definition of the new MedBiquitous verb.  Ellen commented you could have a registry definition and a description in the profile that is different. The group will wait until a formal announcement has been made to ANSI before proceeding further.   

5. Open discussion

Erick commented that they are setting up training for lab procedures. Their tracking needs are similar to the SCORM xAPI profile. They will try to use similar structures to those created for the VP profile. David agreed Erick’s input would be helpful moving forward.  Ellen asked Erick if the use cases made them decide to go with TinCan for SCORM-based content.  Erick mentioned data will be coming from multiple learning management systems. They need a single place to track information and update content.  The CDC may go straight to xAPI and develop content using xAPI statements.  Ellen added they could have the engine convert content.  Ellen’s group is going to use the new SCORM engine with the new LMS bringing up the LRS side of it for a pilot.  HPML will be useful for nursing on boarding and professional development.

Luke commented they are not working on this at the moment, but want to stay informed in case it affects their projects.   

Erick asked about authentication for actors. Ellen replied that user, activity provider, and activity are all authenticated.  They are getting help from several vendors to implement.  

Decisions

Action Items

  • No labels