Mapping SIG Meeting (2016-01)

1

Welcome

@Hazel Brear

2

 Conflicts of Interest

@Hazel Brear

 None declared

3 

Notes and actions from previous meeting 

 @Hazel Brear

No actions closed. Two open actions, neither due today.

 4

Allergy and Adverse Sensitivity Implementation Guidance report

@Jim Campbell

Jim was unable to join the call due to conflicts. he had hoped to join later in the meeting to discuss this item but the meeting was short tonight. I have emailed Jim and suggested he send an update which we can post to confluence.

5 

Mapping Service Team Report 

@Krista Lilly

 Krista reported highlights of activities  for the Mapping Service Team over the last month:

• The SNOMED CT to ICD-10 map has been released with the January 2016 release.

• The SNOMED CT to ICD-9CM map is now deprecated with support. No further active work on this but will address any concerns raised.

• Mapping Service Team are orienting to new tools e.g. confluence, new IHTSDO authoring tool.

• Updating documentation of some of our processes e.g. workflow.

• In the process of formulating particular searches using the map tool to identify areas that may require QA, extracting the maps and looking at those maps, related maps in order to improve the quality of the maps in those areas.

Ian reported:

• In process internally of training up the mapping team to do clinical authoring of SNOMED CT hence them getting used to the new SNOMED CT authoring tool. The reason for doing this is partially to do with actual work load but the obvious benefit of them authoring is to bring a mapping perspective to the authoring of content and to bring more knowledge around SNOMED CT content into the mapping team. This realises benefits on both sides. This is quite a change to previous working practices. We are looking at using 2016 to bring the mapping team up to speed with both the ne authoring tooling and the authoring procedures.

6. 

 Future direction of Mapping SIG

@Ian Green

Ian discussed the proposal to transform the Mapping SIG into a sub-advisory group of the Editorial Advisory Group with Jim Case who chairs the group and is the Head of Terminology at IHTSDO. Jim believes that the Editorial AG should be purely focused on editorial matters and consequently would not be the right 'home' for a Mapping AG.

So there are now 2 possibilities for the group:

• Form a Mapping Advisory Group in its own right (stand-a-alone in terms of governance). In terms of all AG these link together via the management team members. Communication is ensured by these IHTSDO. A potential benefit to this option is the the group would have a greater degree of freedom over setting our own agenda.

• Make it a sub-group of the Content Managers AG which is chaired by Ian and made up of representatives from each of the member countries. This may present closer ways of working. A potential benefit of this option is the fact that the representation on that group is from member countries and are potentially the people who use the maps that we produce. So there would be improved communication links coming back from members directly in to the mapping group from people who are using mapping products.

• Ian is looking for a steer on where the group feels this should sit. Working with other groups is a given. 

• The group need time to think about the options. See action.

 @Ian Green to update the presentation with the new proposed options (including pro's and con's) and send to @Hazel Brear to circulate to the group allowing time for consideration before the next meeting.

7. 

NRC reports

Hazel Brear

• UK are still working towards freeze of data on 21 January 2016

8. 

Any other business

 None