Stream: Da Vinci
Topic: CQL Parameters for DEQM IG
Paul Denning (Mar 16 2022 at 12:54):
[1] https://jira.hl7.org/browse/FHIR-31416
[2] https://jira.hl7.org/browse/FHIR-30932
[3] http://build.fhir.org/ig/HL7/cqf-recommendations/artifacts.html#operationdefinition-index
I'm seeking feedback on FHIR-31416 [1]
Please reply if you know of quality measures or gaps in care use cases that would benefit from passing additional parameters into the CQL/ELM evaluation.
Currently $evaluate-measure and $care-gaps do not support passing in arbitrary parameters.
CPG IG defines how to do this for some other operations [3].
CQI WG has voted to add this capability for R5 [2].
We have not yet voted to add this capability to R4-based DEQM IG [1].
Details for CPG IG:
https://github.com/HL7/cqf-recommendations/blob/master/resources/operationdefinition-cpg-plandefinition-apply.json#L139-L146
https://github.com/HL7/cqf-recommendations/blob/master/resources/operationdefinition-cpg-library-evaluate.json#L44-L51
https://github.com/HL7/cqf-recommendations/blob/master/resources/operationdefinition-cpg-library-evaluate.json#L44-L51
https://github.com/HL7/cqf-recommendations/blob/master/resources/operationdefinition-cpg-careplan-apply.json#L121-L127
https://github.com/HL7/cqf-recommendations/blob/master/pages/libraries.md#610-using-cql
Corey Sanders (Mar 16 2022 at 13:51):
Hi, Paul. We have an internal use case in the Population Health Management space where we provide gaps in care operations to our clients, but with override capability so that they can tweak parameters of the care gap definition to fit the clients needs. Typically, these are things like patient age threshholds, lab threshholds, etc. This adds a lack of precision in the measure report because it isn't possible to know exactly which measure logic was applied without knowing parameter values, so we also added a place in the MeasureReport to store the parameter override values. All the current extension details are in the Alvearie FHIR IG definitions. The folks that own that process are @Stuart Cox and @Kimberly Kenna and can speak better to the specific client needs as needed. I don't believe any of those profiles extended from Davinci profiles right now. There were conversations about it, but the work was deferred. So, if the question is do we need it from Davinci, the answer is no. If the question is whether or not we think it is a good idea to add those, then the answer is yes.
Paul Denning (Mar 16 2022 at 14:43):
Thanks. Note that DEQM IG care and feeding in CY2022+ is by CQI WG. Da Vinci will not be focusing on DEQM. You make a good point about having the returned resources contain some indication of the input parameters used to create it. If we can do something to make it easier to extend DEQM IG profiles in your IG, let us know.
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
