IRC log of hcls on 2007-03-29

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:57:38 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #hcls

14:57:38 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/03/29-hcls-irc

14:57:53 [eneumann]

rrsagent, set log world-visible

14:58:52 [Zakim]

SW_HCLS()11:00AM has now started

14:58:59 [Zakim]

+ +1.216.636.aaaa

15:00:09 [Zakim]

+Eric_Neumann

15:01:46 [BillBug]

BillBug has joined #hcls

15:01:55 [Zakim]

+Vipul_Kashyap

15:02:20 [Zakim]

+ +1.317.435.aabb

15:02:37 [eneumann]

zakim, aaaa is chimezie

15:02:37 [Zakim]

+chimezie; got it

15:02:41 [Zakim]

+Olivier_Bodenreider

15:02:48 [Zakim]

+ +1.813.396.aacc

15:03:18 [Zakim]

+Bill_Bug

15:03:21 [Zakim]

+ +1.301.975.aadd

15:03:24 [Zakim]

+ +1.801.442.aaee

15:03:30 [vipul]

vipul has joined #hcls

15:03:50 [Tonya]

Tonya has joined #hcls

15:03:54 [eneumann]

zakim, aacc is Rachael

15:03:54 [Zakim]

+Rachael; got it

15:04:12 [eneumann]

zakim, aabb is Susie

15:04:12 [Zakim]

+Susie; got it

15:04:39 [eneumann]

zakim, aadd is tn_bhat

15:04:39 [Zakim]

+tn_bhat; got it

15:04:57 [eneumann]

zakim, aaee is Stan_Huff

15:05:00 [Zakim]

+Stan_Huff; got it

15:05:14 [Zakim]

+Tanya_Hongsermeier

15:06:05 [eneumann]

zakim, who's here?

15:06:28 [Zakim]

On the phone I see chimezie, Eric_Neumann, Vipul_Kashyap, Susie, Olivier_Bodenreider, Rachael, Bill_Bug, tn_bhat, Stan_Huff, Tanya_Hongsermeier

15:06:38 [Zakim]

On IRC I see Tonya, vipul, BillBug, RRSAgent, Zakim, eneumann, ericP

15:06:40 [Zakim]

-Stan_Huff

15:07:35 [Zakim]

+Stan_Huff

15:07:41 [eneumann]

zakim, pick a vicitm

15:07:41 [Zakim]

I don't understand 'pick a vicitm', eneumann

15:07:51 [Zakim]

-Stan_Huff

15:07:52 [eneumann]

zakim, pick a scribe

15:07:52 [Zakim]

Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Bill_Bug

15:08:38 [Zakim]

+Stan_Huff

15:09:39 [BillBug]

EN: Alan not on call

15:09:41 [BillBug]

Review Demo issues briefly

15:09:42 [BillBug]

just 5 wks until workshop

15:09:44 [BillBug]

must wittle down to the essentially tasks in the next week

15:09:46 [BillBug]

many deliverables alan is expecting next week

15:09:48 [BillBug]

questions?

15:11:18 [BillBug]

SS: another informal F2F at MIT - April 10

15:11:20 [BillBug]

working on modeling of data sets in RDF & OWL

15:11:21 [BillBug]

will be checking to make certain things WILL connect as expected

15:11:34 [BillBug]

EN: Hope to see lots of code & tools coming together by then

15:12:10 [BillBug]

EN: any questions re: demo or tasks?

15:12:12 [BillBug]

Did put a link on the WIki to solicit more help for Alan?

15:12:13 [BillBug]

No outstanding questions

15:13:57 [BillBug]

VK: Introduce Stan Huff and Tom Oniki

15:13:59 [BillBug]

Showing clinical model work

15:14:00 [BillBug]

looking for overlap with OTF - looking for synergies - represent in RDF & OWL

15:14:02 [BillBug]

ACPP TF overlap - look for more overlap with CDISC

15:14:11 [vipul]

http://esw.w3.org/topic/HCLS/OntologyTaskForce?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=CEM.ppt

15:14:24 [ericP]

Zakim, please dial ericP-office

15:14:24 [Zakim]

ok, ericP; the call is being made

15:14:25 [Zakim]

+EricP

15:15:18 [BillBug]

SH: Talk from PPT slides

15:15:20 [BillBug]

format of speaking on HCLS TCon

15:15:22 [BillBug]

(EN: have 45 minutes)

15:15:24 [BillBug]

Will go through slides - questions at end

15:15:44 [BillBug]

SH: obviously more info than can be covered in 45 minutes

15:15:46 [BillBug]

can plan follow-ups if useful

15:16:22 [ericP]

slides are http://esw.w3.org/topic/HCLS/OntologyTaskForce?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=CEM.ppt ?

15:16:30 [BillBug]

EN: In the audience we have BOTH clinical and basic LS research

15:16:32 [BillBug]

recommend going quickly - let non-clinical folks review on their time

15:16:42 [BillBug]

SH: Team effort (slide 2)

15:17:39 [BillBug]

SH: Real goals - not just data - trying to enable LIFETIME e-record (from pre-natal to post-death)

15:17:41 [BillBug]

linking to all relevant services

15:17:42 [BillBug]

(see slide 3)

15:18:11 [BillBug]

SH: Depends on SHARED common info models coupled to shared terminologies & ontologies

15:18:45 [BillBug]

SH: What is a Detailed Clinical Model? (slide 5 - high-level overview)

15:19:09 [BillBug]

SH: Slide 5 - simple example (systemic BP)

15:19:19 [ericP]

slide 6

15:20:04 [BillBug]

SH: re: longitudinal record (slide 6)

15:20:06 [BillBug]

what record to support use 100+ years

15:20:07 [BillBug]

legal record

15:20:09 [BillBug]

data will outlive service, app, message format, AND person

15:20:24 [BillBug]

SH: focused on logical structure of data AND interactions with standard terms & ontologies

15:21:13 [BillBug]

SH: Real time, patient specific, decision support (slide 7)

15:21:14 [BillBug]

All patient specific info - most appropriate course of care for that specific patient

15:21:34 [eneumann]

scribe: BillBug

15:22:35 [BillBug]

SH: Sharing data (slide 8)

15:22:37 [BillBug]

reduce labor within HC enterprise

15:22:38 [BillBug]

outside enterprise - many needs (need standard model for it to be computable) - especially to support analysis of this data

15:22:40 [BillBug]

use data to improve patient care (outcomes-based - evaluate intervention outcomes - natural disease course)

15:22:48 [ericP]

slide 10

15:23:01 [ericP]

(i think)

15:23:14 [BillBug]

SH: National & Internation sharing (slide 10)

15:23:32 [BillBug]

last ref - sharing data (slide 8 & 9)

15:24:20 [BillBug]

SH: create NEW kinds of HC marketplace (slide 11)

15:24:22 [BillBug]

create apps against standard services using common logical model for patient data

15:24:39 [ericP]

slide 12

15:24:46 [ericP]

(picture seems applicable)

15:25:05 [BillBug]

SH: Order Entry API (slide 12)

15:25:07 [BillBug]

same back end - front ends swap out - regardless how complex the app

15:25:46 [BillBug]

SH: escape repetative, vertically stacked, hard-code connection between backend (serializaiton & data exchange) and specific app

15:26:04 [BillBug]

SH: Shared public standard for DCM & for APIs/Services

15:27:26 [BillBug]

SH: on slide 18 now

15:28:05 [BillBug]

EN: What is COS

15:28:07 [BillBug]

SH: Common Order Service (consider same as Common Object Service)

15:28:21 [BillBug]

SH: Curly brackets problem (slide 18)

15:29:01 [eneumann]

Clinical syntaxes: ARDEN, JELLO

15:30:04 [BillBug]

SH: Arden Syntax (slide 18)

15:30:06 [BillBug]

place shared data within curly brackets

15:30:08 [BillBug]

DCM target shared logical model that provide more specific access to detailed data elements

15:30:26 [BillBug]

SH: need standard model & repostiory (slide 19)

15:30:45 [eneumann]

thniks Stan's desccription of "Shared logical model..." very close to RDF-OWL model

15:30:51 [BillBug]

SH: Can't depend on free-text data (Slide 20)

15:30:59 [eneumann]

s/thniks/thinks

15:31:36 [BillBug]

SH: Prospective decision support precludes use of free-text

15:31:38 [BillBug]

Need shared, precise DCM

15:32:34 [BillBug]

SH: Example - SNOMED CT - numbness in specific limb (slide 21)

15:32:36 [BillBug]

same codes to represent limb numbness - regardless of which limb - no good for computability

15:32:37 [BillBug]

need that in model

15:35:01 [BillBug]

SH: Too many ways to say the same thing (Slides 22, 23, & 24)

15:35:02 [BillBug]

Need the ability to qualify a measure (e.g. wt) so as to TRULY descriminate TRULY distinct measures

15:35:04 [BillBug]

Can end up with totally different representation for same info depending on codes and variable model syntax (slide 24)

15:36:19 [Zakim]

+ +1.801.736.aaff

15:37:02 [BillBug]

SH: RDBMS implications (slide 25)

15:37:03 [BillBug]

tuples have different structure

15:37:05 [BillBug]

example of using qualification to specify detailed WT type

15:37:07 [BillBug]

can't be easily made commensurate across two models (+/-qualification)

15:37:09 [BillBug]

end up needing totally different logic

15:37:11 [BillBug]

or specific logic JUST to disambiguate

15:37:15 [ericP]

q+ to note that term mismatch examples all have unequivocal mapping

15:38:14 [BillBug]

SH: more complex examples (slide 26)

15:38:15 [BillBug]

these REALLY encourage a cornucopia of models (if your underlying shared model is NOT sufficient nuanced to capture detail)

15:39:33 [eneumann]

ack ericP

15:39:33 [Zakim]

ericP, you wanted to note that term mismatch examples all have unequivocal mapping

15:40:01 [BillBug]

SH: Need shared terms/ontos AS WELL AS shared, layered DCM (Slide 27)

15:40:02 [BillBug]

modelling in layers allows for required variability in application detail

15:41:19 [BillBug]

EP: seems previous examples can be unequivovally mapped

15:41:21 [BillBug]

SH: though these more complex - and abstract pre-coordinated entities such as syndromes

15:41:22 [BillBug]

end up with a very lossy translation

15:42:01 [BillBug]

SH: (back to slide 27)

15:42:02 [BillBug]

layer model - helps in variety of integration scenarios with differing levels of detail

15:43:27 [BillBug]

SH: Slide 31 - How do we use the models?

15:43:28 [BillBug]

different use depending on the task - API interprocess comm, Core services, Decision Logic

15:44:13 [BillBug]

SH: Bottom line - DCM does NOT dictate physical model

15:44:15 [BillBug]

so app sharing and widget sharing can be eminantly re-usable

15:45:35 [BillBug]

SH: Data entry validation (Slide 32 & 33)

15:45:36 [BillBug]

model helps to insure validation before data reaches backend store

15:45:37 [eneumann]

wonders if data storage service (DSS) validation is identical with RDF-S and OWL validation?

15:45:38 [BillBug]

known model PRIOR to storing data

15:45:39 [BillBug]

need tools that build off that model (validation just one example)

15:46:44 [BillBug]

SH: Clinical Element Model (Slide 35)

15:46:45 [BillBug]

EIM Subject Areas (high level)

15:46:47 [BillBug]

had started with high-level and drilled down to detail

15:46:49 [BillBug]

now focus on detail and map it up to the higher-level

15:47:35 [Zakim]

- +1.801.736.aaff

15:49:54 [ericP]

i envision a panel as an input form for a testor to fill out

15:50:36 [BillBug]

SH: Conceptual hierarchichy of Clinical Element Models (slide 36)

15:50:38 [BillBug]

from top to bottom - abstract core that gets more detail as you proceed to actual data element

15:50:40 [BillBug]

those low-level elements can turn out to be used in many ways in the intermediate layer

15:50:41 [BillBug]

EN: LabOpsPanel ?

15:50:43 [BillBug]

SH: These are arbitrary collections of data needed for a certain clinical decision process

15:50:44 [BillBug]

However, the underlying results may have MANY MORE uses outside of that process node

15:50:46 [BillBug]

(e.g., Chem7, Chem20, Serum Sodium)

15:50:47 [BillBug]

a STATEMENT - is a single sentence where adverbs& adjectives about single subject.

15:50:49 [BillBug]

WHEREAS - a panel is a paragraph with statements about many subjects

15:51:27 [BillBug]

EN: 11:50 - time for questions?

15:51:29 [BillBug]

Should we jump to later detail slides?

15:51:30 [BillBug]

SH: Whatever you like.

15:52:23 [BillBug]

EN: Is your work and your consortium - I see XML mentioned

15:52:25 [BillBug]

Are folks familiar with RDF?

15:52:27 [BillBug]

SH: Familiar with OWL

15:52:29 [BillBug]

Alan Rector has been using OWL for same types of models

15:52:31 [BillBug]

Very interested to see how they can be used to represent the models

15:52:55 [BillBug]

EN: Perusing your models, they seem to have goals very much commensurate with underlying SemWeb Tech/RDF goals

15:52:57 [BillBug]

EN: other questions?

15:54:33 [BillBug]

EP: Panels recorded in XML?

15:54:35 [BillBug]

SH: Our own XML dialect (XSD?)

15:54:36 [BillBug]

EP: enables you to extract elements from panels (e.g., person's wt) for other uses?

15:54:38 [BillBug]

SH: yes

15:54:40 [BillBug]

EP: seems to be exact match to how RDF is designed to let individual STATEMENTS stand on their own in exactly this way - very promising for SemWeb synergy

15:55:54 [BillBug]

SH: Statements

15:55:55 [BillBug]

both unitary and compound

15:55:57 [BillBug]

e.g., BP - may depend on qualification re: posture, etc.

15:55:58 [BillBug]

need to deal with individual element inter-dependencies.

15:56:13 [ericP]

slide 59: Hard Issues

15:58:40 [BillBug]

VK: Is there underlying UML?

15:58:42 [BillBug]

SH: Hard issue (second to last slide)

15:58:43 [BillBug]

What is actually instantiated in the software object instantiation?

15:58:45 [BillBug]

gamut: only core elements represented as objects - all other info are constraints

15:58:46 [BillBug]

other end: ALL elements are instantiated as REAL objects (e.g., BP, wt, serium Na+, etc.)

15:58:48 [BillBug]

We chose the middle layer as the appropriate layer to model in UML

15:58:49 [BillBug]

at the VA - added their own constraint language to UML to model more detail

16:00:16 [BillBug]

VK: balance between implementing ALL detail (and including detail in model) for serialization

16:00:17 [BillBug]

vs. an Interlingua (where you have to limit detail for it to be relevant)

16:00:19 [BillBug]

Of course, too abstract also has minimal utility (HL7 & RIM)

16:00:20 [BillBug]

SH: exactly correct.

16:01:53 [BillBug]

SH: Even within HL7 - been work to additionally constrain models to construct templates that are more immediately useful as opposed to being too abstract to be useful to a broad community with a variety of app requirements.

16:01:55 [BillBug]

SH: From purely Modeling standpoint

16:01:57 [BillBug]

models should be independent of these detailed application requirements

16:01:59 [BillBug]

pick the model detail layer that you require.

16:03:38 [BillBug]

EN: How much effort (e.g., code writing) is required to implement

16:03:39 [BillBug]

Is it largely automatic

16:03:41 [BillBug]

SH: right now, a lot of effort required

16:03:43 [BillBug]

There are better ways to add automation to implementation

16:03:44 [BillBug]

Should do more education for SW Engineers to communicate what our app requirements are.

16:03:46 [BillBug]

q+

16:04:27 [BillBug]

is model hierarchy a problem (typical UML & XML Schema problem)

16:05:55 [eneumann]

ack BillBug

16:06:25 [BillBug]

SH: We're very open to SemWeb Tech collaboration

16:06:26 [BillBug]

remember: this work is a decade old

16:06:28 [BillBug]

also - design decisions made and ran ahead of available tech

16:06:29 [BillBug]

in HC IT commercial sector - have immediate needs the

16:08:00 [BillBug]

SH: Yes strict model hierachy is a problem

16:08:01 [BillBug]

need polymorphism that includes multiple inheritance

16:08:03 [BillBug]

both XML & Java get in our way of doing

16:08:20 [Zakim]

-tn_bhat

16:09:11 [BillBug]

EN: very useful for us

16:09:13 [BillBug]

suggest those interested in HCLS have follow-up discussions

16:09:14 [BillBug]

might be useful to have short SemWeb presentation as mapped to the DCM goals

16:09:16 [BillBug]

VK: could coordinate that

16:09:39 [BillBug]

VK: Come up with interesting OTF tasks that include OWL representations of elements from the DCM

16:10:05 [eneumann]

ACTION: Vipul to set up on folow-up call with DCM and Stan Huff to describe SW standards and uses

16:11:01 [BillBug]

SH: That would be extremely useful

16:11:03 [BillBug]

VK: Aware of Alan Rector work in OWL - will include

16:11:05 [BillBug]

SH: We collaborate indirectly with Alan et al (at AMIA meetings, etc.)

16:11:33 [Zakim]

-Olivier_Bodenreider

16:13:16 [vipul]

Gotta go now ...

16:13:21 [BillBug]

EN: last question

16:13:22 [BillBug]

Work around clinical trials - overlaps with Drug Efficacy HCLS work.

16:13:24 [BillBug]

Will see the BP example coming up there too.

16:13:25 [BillBug]

We can contribute that the followup

16:13:28 [BillBug]

Can help inform how OWL needs to evolve.

16:13:28 [vipul]

Will follow up with Stan ...

16:13:28 [BillBug]

Leave to VK to setup topics for agenda

16:13:30 [BillBug]

VK: Yes - exactly what I had in mind

16:13:31 [BillBug]

Examples from CDISC and clinical trials

16:13:33 [BillBug]

EN: Has SH et al. worked with CDISC directly

16:13:34 [BillBug]

SH: not directly - but very familiar with the work - have worked with them in past.

16:13:41 [BillBug]

EN: We can help coordinate work with CDISC

16:13:42 [BillBug]

SH: great

16:14:03 [BillBug]

EN: Thanks SH et al for presentation - will be in touch to coordinate

16:14:04 [BillBug]

EN: Next call a week from now

16:14:06 [Zakim]

-Susie

16:14:09 [Zakim]

-Tanya_Hongsermeier

16:14:11 [Zakim]

-chimezie

16:14:12 [Zakim]

-Rachael

16:14:13 [Zakim]

-Eric_Neumann

16:14:13 [Zakim]

-Stan_Huff

16:14:13 [BillBug]

EN: continue on demo.

16:14:19 [Zakim]

-EricP

16:14:26 [Zakim]

-Bill_Bug

16:14:43 [eneumann]

rrsagent, draft minutes

16:14:43 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/03/29-hcls-minutes.html eneumann

16:14:56 [eneumann]

rrsagent, bye

16:14:56 [RRSAgent]

I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/29-hcls-actions.rdf :

16:14:56 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Vipul to set up on folow-up call with DCM and Stan Huff to describe SW standards and uses [1]

16:14:56 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/29-hcls-irc#T16-10-05