Regulated Clinical Research Information Management (RCRIM) Technical Committee Meeting Minutes

Teleconference

June 22, 2010

Attendees

First Name / Last Name / Affiliation / E-mail Address /
Becky / Angeles / ScenPro /
Kristi / Eckerson / Emory University /
Joel / Finkle / Image Solutions, Inc. /
Myron / Finseth / Medtronic /
Patricia / Garvey / FDA /
Terry / Hardin / PerfiTech /
Ed / Tripp / Edward S. Tripp and Associates /
Julia / Zhang / Genzyme /

Note: Quorum of 10 plus a co-chair was not reached for this meeting. No decisions for RCRIM were made at this meeting and the following documents discussion that took place.

I.  Status of RPSr2 Ballot Reconciliation

Jason was not able to be on the call but submitted the following:

We have all changes are text based except one. That one change is just a change in cardinality. We agreed to test with what we have and when we update the text the next time we ballot.

We discussed in the past the value of updating the text—If others want, and HL7 HQ agrees, we can update the text and post on the site. We did not see value on updating the text if we could not post on the ballot site. I already have the text updated and ready to go the next we ballot.

Joel Finkle commented that the “change in cardinality” has impact on the schema, and thus the applications which implement the message.

The concern expressed by Ed Tripp is that for the ballot to be considered to be placed in DSTU, the DSTU must be published. In order to request publication of the DSTU, ballot reconciliation must be approved by RCRIM, the spreadsheet posted to the ballot site and a request made to withdraw the negative comments. This will be placed on the agenda for July 6, 2010 so that we can work to finalize ballot reconciliation and move to DSTU publication.

II.  Status of SPLr5 Ballot Reconciliation

SPLr5 reconciliation was approved at the RCRIM meeting in Rio de Janeiro; however, the reconciliation package has not been posted to the ballot site. The same process as outlined above must be followed to publish the DSTU.

The SPLr5 team has been focused on resolution of the impact of ITSr2. There is a recommendation from the technical team to the leadership team on how to approach changes from ITSr2.

Ed Tripp will follow up with Gunther Schadow on the reconciliation package.

III.  Other Business

Joel requested that we revisit the RASH project. This will be placed on the agenda for July 6, 2010.

Ed Tripp cautioned that the ballot cycle between October and January is extremely short. Projects planning on a January ballot should either start preparation in advance of the October meeting or plan on moving the ballot to May 2011.

Ed Tripp cautioned that the meeting in Cambridge is expected to be heavily attended and RCRIM members should plan on making reservation early.

End of Document