Feedback on CMAG 2022 Work Plan
Summary
Please provide feedback on the 2022 work plan. Feedback due by November 12th.
Actions:
Date | Requested action | Requester(s) | Response required by: | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Oct 21, 2021 | Please provide feedback on the CMAG 2022 Work Plan | @Cathy Richardson | @Camilla Wiberg Danielsen Nov 12, 2021 @Anna Harasim Nov 12, 2021 @Elze de Groot Nov 12, 2021 @Linda Parisien Nov 12, 2021 @susannaprnn Nov 12, 2021 @Former user (Deleted) Nov 12, 2021 @Jostein Ven Nov 12, 2021 @Theresa Barry Nov 12, 2021 @Libby Antoun Nov 12, 2021 @Katrien Scheerlinck (Unlicensed) Nov 12, 2021 @Eugene Viacrucis Nov 12, 2021 | Please post your final responses in the Country response table below. Discussion comments can be made as comments. |
Relevant documents
Links
Country response
Country | Date | Response |
|---|---|---|
USA | 20OCT2021 | The 2022 workplan is appropriate to the functioning of the CMAG group. It is intentionally generic and will be updated as specific issues arise. |
Sweden | 21OCT2021 | The 2022 workplan looks good. |
Denmark | 20211021 | Agree. |
Canada | 20211021 | No edits to propose. |
Australia | 20211101 | Nothing to add. |
UK | Nov 10, 2021 | No suggestions for a change |
Ireland | Nov 28 2021 | The workplan looks good, however for item 1 Provision of national perspectives on current SNOMED CT content projects and topics, does this mean perspective from NRC's on work happening at national level or the impact SI content may have on NRC's ? Otherwise looks good. |
New Zealand | 20211130 | The workplan looks good but turn around timeframes for advice to editorial board can be too tight- can we have a minimum to ensure we have time to investigate and contact subject matter experts and collate the feedback? |
Belgium | 20220110 | I agree. |
CMAG response
Date | CMAG Response | Next steps |
|---|---|---|
Final outcome:
Date:
Copyright © 2025, SNOMED International