Welcome and introductions

5

@Peter Williams

@Rob Hausam

Recording + Notes.

Summary of previous week

5

@Peter Williams

@Rob Hausam

Summary of previous week:

• 2018-03-06 - SNOMED on FHIR Meeting (TS)

Profile for Specimen Resouce

65

@Daniel Karlsson

Specimen binding

Suggestion from @Jim Case that the type attribute would be better bound to (< Substance plus < Morphologic Abnormality plus < Physical Object (or selection thereof)) rather than Specimen as it avoids any potential conflict with the other attributes and is effectively opening up post coordination, rather than sticking to a inherently restricted set of pre-coordinated concepts.

Similarly (@Former user (Deleted)), the method attribute is currently a selection of SNOMED CT concepts plus a V2 valueset.

Two main options:

1. Use Specimen hierarchy for "type" and then constrain what can appear in the other fields (and how we deal with conflict!)

2. Put all information into a post coordinated expression in the "type" attribute (@Jim Case noted that some aspects - like the shipping container - may not be characteristics intrinsic to the specimen).

@Jim Case also suggested that using these decomposed fields would only be used outside of a SNOMED context. Otherwise could be achieved - (PWI: more safely due to MRCM) - with post coordinated.

ValueSets

10

@Daniel Karlsson

How do we produce and publish ValueSets?

• Tools?

Molecular Pathology harmonising V2 and FHIR Datasets.

@Jim Campbell

Molecular Pathology harmonising V2 and FHIR Datasets

Next TB meeting

5

27 March 2018