14:59:55 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #HCLS
14:59:55 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/10/06-HCLS-irc
15:01:09 <Anita> Is the phone line up? I'm not hearing anything...
15:01:15 <Lena> Lena has joined #hcls
15:01:25 <bobP> phone is up!
15:01:35 <Anita> Yay
15:01:52 <Lena> zakim is misbehaving, though... 
15:02:19 <DaveHau> DaveHau has joined #HCLS
15:02:36 <mscottm> Zakim is overloaded
15:04:05 <mscottm> Zakim, who is here?
15:04:13 <Lena> can't call :(
15:04:26 <Lena> disconnects itself before I have a chance to put the code in
15:04:28 <mscottm> I had to enter 4257# twice (as usual)
15:04:57 <mscottm> @Lena: maybe wait until traffic slows a bit
15:05:12 <ericP> ericP has joined #hcls
15:05:42 <mscottm> @Lena: I'll Skype you in if you keep having problems.
15:05:45 <Lena> i'm in!!!
15:05:53 <mscottm> Yay!
15:05:54 <bobP> ericP and Michel starting the agendas.
15:06:01 <Lena> i think zakim saw eric and was afraid :D
15:06:02 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #HCLS
15:06:27 <michel> zakim, who is here?
15:06:44 <Zakim> sorry, michel, I don't know what conference this is
15:06:54 <michel> zakim, this is HCLS
15:07:08 <bobP> Rich Boyce, U Pittsburgh is here.
15:07:10 <Zakim> On IRC I see ericP, DaveHau, Lena, RRSAgent, mscottm, matthias_samwald, bobP, boycer, Anita, michel, egonw__
15:07:20 <Zakim> ok, michel; that matches SW_HCLS()11:00AM
15:08:01 <bobP> Michel: First and foremost, let's thank the co-chairs
15:08:17 <bobP> ... have built lots of different communities
15:08:22 <Zakim> + +33.1.73.71.aaff
15:09:21 <bobP> ... New chairs, Michel, Charlie Mead,...
15:09:24 <iker> iker has joined #hcls
15:10:10 <Zakim> +??P0
15:10:20 <michel> http://www.w3.org/blog/SW/2011/10/03/unveiling-the-w3c-hclsig-charter/
15:10:29 <Zakim> +George_Thomas
15:10:39 <George> George has joined #HCLS
15:10:40 <rkiefer> rkiefer has joined #hcls
15:11:24 <ericP> topic: Use Cases
15:11:32 <ericP> scribenick: ericP
15:11:39 <michel> use case template: http://tinyurl.com/626fnxj
15:11:40 <bobP> ... Have developed templates for use cases;
15:11:55 <ericP> scribenick: bobP 
15:12:10 <bobP> take it over, ericP!
15:13:28 <ericP> topic: Charlie Mead:
15:13:32 <bobP> Charlie: Work at NCI, involved w HL7
15:14:04 <bobP> ... considerable interest at NCI and HL7 to address problems of interoperability across delivery
15:14:14 <bobP> ... and HC and basic science
15:14:27 <bobP> ... agreed that use cases must be grounded
15:14:48 <bobP> ... HL7 came to realize that specs need to be limited to interoperability
15:14:59 <George> such as an RDFS or OWL version of CCD?
15:15:00 <bobP> ... HL7 has interest in this semantic space
15:15:17 <bobP> ... on the wire formatting; there is immediate interest
15:15:42 <bobP> ... CDISC has been focussed on clinical trial, but have also been building repositories
15:16:00 <bobP> ... perfect storm of opportunities between their requirements and semweb
15:16:24 <bobP> ... hope for active participation among HL7, CDISC, semweb
15:16:48 <George> zakim, who is speaking?
15:16:48 <bobP> Lena(?): Even bigger gap between clinical and research
15:16:59 <Zakim> George, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: ??P7 (50%)
15:17:09 <bobP> ... is there intention to bridge this too?
15:17:35 <bobP> Charlie Mead: Yes, translational medicine.
15:17:43 <mscottm> Lena pointed out that there is a bigger gap between clinical research and wet lab biology research (compared to clinical trial and clinical research)
15:18:17 <bobP> ... NIH perfect example of data used in both cinical care and research domains
15:18:34 <bobP> ... incredibly complicated. Example is cohorts.
15:18:58 <bobP> ... sounds siimple, but it's not. Barriers are semantic primarily!
15:19:07 <Anita> Sorry what are 'cohorts'? 
15:19:30 <bobP> cohorts of patients in clinical trials
15:19:50 <bobP> Lena: Data are proprietary, we cannot get our hands on the data
15:19:55 <ericP> q
15:20:06 <mscottm> cohorts are the patients that have been aggregated for study according to inclusion and exclusion criteria
15:20:09 <bobP> Charlie: Increasing pressure from users to break down the walls
15:20:13 <ericP> q+ to say that the I2B2 folks have somewhat solved this
15:20:17 <Anita> Thanks BobP - is that like groups with similar features? 
15:20:25 <bobP> ... semantic problems are the deep problems
15:20:51 <bobP> Anita: see Scott's comment - he the man :)
15:21:09 <bobP> Charlie: 3B euro project to move data
15:21:10 <Anita> semantic = deep problem; openness = big problem - major effort in Europe to solve this
15:21:26 <Anita> We work on the deep problem ;-)
15:21:34 <bobP> ... starting to give way, exposing security and granularity issues
15:21:48 <Anita> Right thanks MScottM - got it!
15:22:00 <bobP> ... semweb can point the way. Consumers are demanding
15:22:17 <bobP> ericP: i2b2 folks have addressed half of this.
15:22:52 <bobP> ... when we make clearer what the semantics are, then we will be able to give IRBs more confidence
15:23:19 <bobP> Lena: Should we start constructing sparql queries
15:23:29 <michel> http://www.ehr4cr.eu/
15:23:36 <mscottm> q+
15:23:38 <bobP> Charlie: Project asking for hcls involvement
15:23:46 <egonw__> egonw__ has joined #HCLS
15:24:18 <bobP> ericP: i2b2 has started down this path of using existing deployed ehr systems and leveraging semantics off of that
15:25:29 <bobP> ... infrastructure is there to exchange thru i2b2
15:25:52 <bobP> ... there is a whole space where semantics are not quite deployed
15:26:19 <bobP> ... but not too far away. Controlled vocabs are hierarchical
15:26:43 <bobP> ... can turn a sparl query into a large i2b2 query
15:27:13 <bobP> Lena: But no guarantees, creating another silo here??
15:27:41 <bobP> ... too much on our plates? Have to think how to do
15:27:55 <bobP> ericP: We must work faster to be future-proof
15:28:27 <bobP> Scott: U. Colombia has imported some microarray data from kidney transplants
15:28:40 <bobP> ... success or failure of transplant
15:29:01 <bobP> ... also U. Pitt has RDF data w sparql endpoints
15:29:27 <bobP> ... also Sage, spoke to John Wilbanks who set up meeting in 2000
15:29:45 <mscottm> http://sagecongress.org/WP/2011agenda/groupd/
15:29:58 <bobP> ... Sage working on pretty much all the same goals
15:30:10 <bobP> ... talking w FDA, comparitor arm data
15:30:23 <bobP> ... maybe engage Sage w our tech and people
15:30:32 <boycer> clarification - the data is de-identified clinical reports from one month of hospital care at University of PIttsburgh Medical center. Intention is for NLP research. We created an index of semantic concepts present in the reports but researchers would still have to request the data through a data sharing agreement.
15:30:52 <bobP> Charlie: Agree with Lena completely, want to answer questions
15:31:10 <Zakim> - +33.1.73.71.aaff
15:31:42 <bobP> Scott: finishing...Sage also project IMI in Europe w Charlie and Michel
15:31:51 <mscottm> http://del-fi.org/consent
15:32:08 <boycer> further clarification on PItt data:The Pitt dataset is also now in TREC for information retrieval research: http://www.dbmi.pitt.edu/nlpfront
15:32:18 <bobP> ... John Wilbanks, consent-to-research permit(?) from patients
15:32:42 <bobP> ... notion of co-define privacy attributes for data and consent agreements
15:32:52 <bobP> ... so can reason over the legalese
15:33:16 <bobP> ... seems like a very promising areas, goes hand-in-hand w social approach
15:33:34 <bobP> ... helping to create conditions where clinical data become more available
15:33:52 <bobP> ... IMI project, would like to see IMI people also participate in hcls
15:34:00 <George> q+
15:34:13 <Anita> Are we discussing use cases in this call? I have a few I'd like to offer up
15:34:47 <bobP> ericP: New charter
15:35:19 <bobP> ... developed use cases before the charter, some of them listed
15:35:39 <bobP> ... charter similar to last one, but calls out access-control policy
15:35:53 <bobP> ... and NIH, HL7, euro, etc
15:36:27 <boycer> Anita: I also sent one to the pub-sem-web list this morning but did not see it post---did you see it
15:36:30 <bobP> ... If people have any good contacts w Euro or Asian versions of NIH - please help
15:36:53 <bobP> Lena: Each Euro country will have its own NIH
15:36:57 <boycer> Anita: (referring to a draft use case)
15:37:33 <bobP> Anita: No Euro FDA either
15:37:40 <Lena> http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=/pages/home/Home_Page.jsp&jsenabled=true
15:37:53 <bobP> ericP: FDA in US would give us entre?
15:38:01 <Lena> @boycer, it's Lena who's speaking, not Anita :)
15:38:12 <bobP> :)
15:38:33 <bobP> Scott: There are a number of Euro agencies
15:38:44 <mscottm> Regarding Lena's comment about EHRs being different languages in Europe: that's what make's RDF ideal - once you have the EHR model in RDF, you can switch between language labels.
15:38:49 <boycer> sorry, understood -- saw "Anita" question about use cases above 
15:38:56 <bobP> ericP: Certain amount of new work in new charter, Scott has brag sheet
15:39:25 <bobP> ... also Pistoia and groups w pharma and vendors to pharma
15:39:32 <bobP> ... can take their use cases
15:39:57 <bobP> ... ties back to how to keep attention; impose more rigor in picking and reporting work
15:40:22 <michel> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DRnwXw7xIOLTjZ4TUiDtT80ouSQYfUqM9KWKXVgr60s/edit?hl=en_US&pli=1
15:40:28 <Anita> Yes there are two actual females on this call ;-)!
15:40:32 <bobP> Michel: Basic idea - to give structure to use cases
15:41:15 <mscottm> Let's hear it for Semantic females! 8)
15:41:17 <boycer> lol
15:41:18 <Anita> And neither of us are the shy, quiet type... 
15:41:26 <bobP> ... organizing by functionality, efficiency, expense, how far reaching
15:41:56 <bobP> ... how to actually achieve this: develop new tech, open and free and unsupported, etc
15:41:56 <Anita> We should start a Grrrls4RDF group or something, Lena... 
15:42:21 <bobP> ... conceptually, lots of things are simple, but then tools; Must get a grip.
15:42:34 <mscottm> Excellent idea - would boost our membership if you keep association with HCLS. 
15:43:19 <bobP> ... What trying to achieve; different to do research article than write notes
15:43:54 <bobP> ... partners. Outside of hcls, bring to table or bring things to the table.
15:44:25 <bobP> ... impact of the work. Varies from science to training in tech
15:44:37 <bobP> ... all these are metrics to evaluate projects
15:45:04 <George> template looks great - i'm on the queue
15:45:32 <George> q?
15:45:37 <ericP> q-
15:46:13 <mscottm> q-
15:46:17 <bobP> Lena(?)
15:46:21 <Anita> q+ to talk about use cases
15:46:37 <ericP> ack George
15:46:38 <mscottm> Anita is speaking (from point of view of Scientific Discourse task force)
15:46:59 <Anita> thanks for explaining and sorry for cutting in line! doh...
15:47:24 <Anita> FYI - our tentative use cases are up at http://www.w3.org/wiki/HCLSIG/SWANSIOC/Actions/RhetoricalStructure/meetings/20111010#Tentative_use_cases_as_per_06_Oct_2011
15:47:25 <bobP> George: is hcls interested in use cases from affordable care act, etc?
15:47:31 <mscottm> no prob Anita
15:48:14 <George> great - thanks
15:48:16 <michel> michel: yes!
15:48:18 <bobP> ericP: Writing down use cases helps us to get started.  Yes,
15:48:18 <ericP> ack next
15:48:22 <boycer> q+ drug safety and question on process
15:48:23 <Zakim> Anita, you wanted to talk about use cases
15:48:47 <bobP> Anita: We have a list of use cases that we are planning
15:49:03 <Anita> Thank you Michel. Is there a good format for saying what/who we need?
15:49:15 <bobP> Michel: Objective is a change in organization
15:49:33 <bobP> ... we have rephrased groups to clubs
15:49:35 <Anita> Michel: change in the organisation - rephrase the interest groups but creating task forces around the use cases
15:49:55 <bobP> ... but now there will be use-case-task-forces w fixed timelines
15:49:56 <boycer> good change - that allows cross interest group tasks
15:49:59 <Anita> People who have a joint interest will regroup themselves; use cases have 6 - 8 months/a year life time
15:50:08 <bobP> ... in that sense we want to scale back the scope
15:50:21 <bobP> ... must be manageable. Finite lifetime.
15:50:23 <Anita> scale back scope of subgroups; use cases define bite-size chunks
15:50:39 <Anita> both in time, particapation, and scope
15:50:45 <bobP> ericP: Chunking happens inside use cases perhaps
15:50:59 <ericP> that link again: http://www.w3.org/wiki/HCLSIG/SWANSIOC/Actions/RhetoricalStructure/meetings/20111010#Tentative_use_cases_as_per_06_Oct_2011
15:51:15 <bobP> Anita: Five sets of use cases up, starting year and a half ago
15:51:54 <bobP> ... 1 id of components of medical text for key claims and evidence
15:52:43 <bobP> ... mark up so that there is a single hypothesis
15:53:14 <bobP> ... compare hyps based on evidence, etc
15:53:47 <bobP> Anita: Impact, NLP and markup, does it scale?
15:54:04 <bobP> ... high risk , high payoff
15:54:35 <bobP> ... 2) collaboration for biomed, lower risk
15:55:18 <michel> zakim, who is making noise?
15:55:29 <Zakim> michel, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: ??P7 (84%)
15:55:32 <bobP> ... 3) ...
15:55:48 <bobP> ... 3) is academic
15:56:29 <bobP> ericP: How do you compare use case value?
15:56:44 <bobP> Anita: Up to participants.
15:57:04 <bobP> ericP: "I can work on five different things."
15:57:50 <bobP> Michel: Understanding what the (meta?) values are, to judge among use cases
15:57:52 <ericP> http://www.w3.org/wiki/HCLSIG/HighLevelUseCases
15:58:02 <ericP> http://www.w3.org/wiki/HCLSIGUseCases
15:58:22 <George> I'll take a look - 
15:58:27 <bobP> ericP: These are styles of use cases. Would be nice to align specific one and prioritize
15:58:46 <bobP> Anita: Start with the data.
15:58:46 <Anita> How to prioritise use cases? Lena: start with the data!
15:59:03 <bobP> Lena! Start with the data.
15:59:05 <Anita> No Bob, that's lena again... I know, it's difficult :-)
15:59:11 <bobP> :)
15:59:14 <Anita> cool
15:59:38 <mscottm> I agree with the principle of starting with the data (in case you haven't heard me say that before ;) )
15:59:56 <Anita> Ok - last two: 4. Mining Treatment Outcomes: Develop a generic, anonymised, multi-EHS compliant format and an information architecture that allows access to symptom/treatment data as a Linked Data source that can be made freely available and used for drug efficacy/outcome (meta)studies      * Leads: Anita de Waard, Joanne Luciano     * Partners: RPI, Elsevier
16:00:26 <bobP> Michel: Encourage the interest groups to (align) with this
16:00:26 <Zakim> - +1.703.216.aaee
16:00:28 <Zakim> -Tony
16:00:31 <Anita> If anyone's interested in working on either of those, drop me a note... the last one is a project we are working on with the VU and Philips. 
16:00:52 <Anita> echochocho - couldn't hear a word
16:00:58 <George> thanks all, bye
16:01:01 <boycer> all I heard ws geeks
16:01:04 <Zakim> -??P2
16:01:12 <Zakim> -??P67
16:01:30 <Anita> Ok thanks! me too - what were you saying EricP? Just repeat yourself... or make art with it...
16:01:51 <Zakim> -George_Thomas
16:01:54 <bobP> ericP: Can continuing geeking
16:01:57 <michel> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:01:57 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/10/06-HCLS-minutes.html michel
16:01:58 <Anita> Geeky? Ack! 
16:02:02 <michel> rrsagent, make log world-visible
16:02:06 <boycer> Anita: question --
16:02:32 <boycer> how to submit new use case -- should it go directly to you or pub-sem-web?
16:02:40 <Zakim> - +31.62.427.aadd
16:02:52 <Zakim> - +1.619.252.aabb
16:02:53 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
16:03:31 <Zakim> -Bob_Powers
16:05:58 <Zakim> -??P0
16:09:47 <Zakim> - +1.412.802.aaaa
16:11:17 <Zakim> -??P7
16:11:18 <Zakim> -EricP
16:11:23 <Zakim> - +1.301.443.aacc
16:11:25 <Zakim> SW_HCLS()11:00AM has ended
16:11:26 <Zakim> Attendees were Tony, +1.412.802.aaaa, Bob_Powers, +1.619.252.aabb, +1.301.443.aacc, +31.62.427.aadd, [IPcaller], EricP, +1.703.216.aaee, +33.1.73.71.aaff, George_Thomas
16:37:56 <Lena> Lena has left #hcls
17:21:19 <egonw__> egonw__ has joined #HCLS
18:15:38 <Zakim> Zakim has left #HCLS