Stream: implementers
Topic: Resource Maturity
Grahame Grieve (Dec 13 2018 at 09:46):
@Michelle (Moseman) Miller @Russell Leftwich I'm just looking at resource maturity for PC resources. Is Condition a candidate for FMM=4? And FamilyMemberHistory FMM=3?
Grahame Grieve (Dec 13 2018 at 09:46):
@Melva Peters @John Hatem Is MedicationKnowledgea candidate for FMM=1?
Grahame Grieve (Dec 13 2018 at 09:48):
@John Moehrke @Alexander Mense can we change the Consent maturity to 2?
John Moehrke (Dec 13 2018 at 13:48):
@John Moehrke @Alexander Mense can we change the Consent maturity to 2?
This would be a question for @David Pyke ... I would say that Consent has mostly met FMM 2. It has been a part of FHIR Connectathons for almost 2 years. I think the thing holding it back is the statement in FMM 2 that it has been tested with 80% of scope. Due to the added scope beyond the intent of CBCP of Privacy. The adding the other types of Consent has been very hard to model, As we have not even seen these use-cases brought to committee. There is some work on Research Consent, but even that space has been hard going. Consent has well established Privacy Consent coverage. So if we could remove these other consents from the scope, we could likely go much higher in FMM. Until then we are at the mercy of the experts in these other kinds of Consent.
David Pyke (Dec 13 2018 at 13:51):
We have moved it to 2 but it dropped back to one with changes. I think Consent's ready to go back to 2 as no significant changes have happenedfor a quite a few months.
Lloyd McKenzie (Dec 13 2018 at 15:10):
FMM 4 requires a WG vote. 3 requires all QA done
Melva Peters (Dec 13 2018 at 16:13):
It's still 0 since it hasn't been approved by FMG
Grahame Grieve (Dec 13 2018 at 20:03):
with regard to consent, the technical definition of 'most of the scope' is met. I think 2 is ok procedurally
Grahame Grieve (Dec 13 2018 at 20:05):
@Melva Peters : I don't know about FMM approval being needed for FMM 1 - not sure. @Lloyd McKenzie @David Hay FMG hasn't been processing resource proposals?
Lloyd McKenzie (Dec 13 2018 at 20:22):
We've been processing resource proposals. We've held off on approving MedicationKnowledge and all of the other medication definition resources until full harmonization is done.
Grahame Grieve (Dec 13 2018 at 20:23):
I don't see any documented requirement for FMG approval for FMM level?
Lloyd McKenzie (Dec 13 2018 at 20:27):
To go to level 1, FMG must approve the resource proposal
Lloyd McKenzie (Dec 13 2018 at 20:27):
For resources, profiles and implementation guides, the FHIR Management Group has approved the underlying resource/profile/IG proposal
Lloyd McKenzie (Dec 13 2018 at 20:28):
After that, the FMG has no say until normative - which is why we're cautious about approving resources until scope issues are nailed down.
Grahame Grieve (Dec 13 2018 at 20:40):
scanned for "FMG" so missed the name in full
Grahame Grieve (Dec 13 2018 at 20:41):
it would be useful to know why some of them are still pending
Michelle (Moseman) Miller (Dec 13 2018 at 22:23):
@Grahame Grieve Regarding FamilyMemberHistory, we have outstanding RIM mappings (via qa.html) and have not fully finished all of the QA necessary to bump it up to FMM = 3, so PC would prefer to leave it as FMM = 2. Regarding Condition, we think there is work left to refine the "example context" of using Condition to represent concern events. For example, we have an outstanding tracker in the backlog logged by Lloyd (GF#17736).
Melva Peters (Dec 13 2018 at 22:23):
I still don't think it's ready for FMM 1 - early stages at this point.
Grahame Grieve (Dec 13 2018 at 22:24):
ok (to both)
John Moehrke (Dec 13 2018 at 22:47):
with regard to consent, the technical definition of 'most of the scope' is met. I think 2 is ok procedurally
I like that. @David Pyke you okay?
David Pyke (Dec 13 2018 at 22:53):
Works for me
Grahame Grieve (Dec 13 2018 at 23:55):
ok changing it to 2
Ken Sinn (Sep 12 2019 at 21:54):
Is there a formalized process for implementers to let the respective WGs know of existing production systems using particular resources? I don't think I've seen anything formal, aside from an occasional ask on WG weekly calls when specifically discussing FMMs. The link to register FHIR implementations on https://www.hl7.org/fhir/versions.html#maturity is broken, and there's nothing about "how to let WGs know that a resource is in production" on https://confluence.hl7.org/display/FHIR/FHIR+Maturity+Model or https://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=FHIR_Maturity_Model
Lloyd McKenzie (Sep 12 2019 at 22:43):
The general advice is to contact the WG by emailing co-chairs, emailing their list or contacting them here and providing the relevant information. They can then add that information to the QA tracking spreadsheet we use for resources.
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
