Docstoc

V3DAM_SECURITY_R1_D1_2010MAY_consolidated_20100521.1830withRiodispositioncomments

Document Sample
V3DAM_SECURITY_R1_D1_2010MAY_consolidated_20100521.1830withRiodispositioncomments Powered By Docstoc
					                                                             V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

                             BALLOT TITLE:       HL7 Version 3 Domain Analysis Model: Security, Release 1 (V3DAM_SECURITY_R1_I2_2010MAY) - 2nd
                                                 Informative Ballot


                           BALLOT CYCLE:         MAY 2010
                       SUBMITTED BY NAME:        Bernd Blobel
                      SUBMITTED BY EMAIL:        bernd.blobel@klinik.uni-regensburg.de
                                                 +49-941-944 6769
                      SUBMITTED BY PHONE:
            SUBMITTED BY ORGANIZATION (if        HL7 Germany
                              applicable):
                       SUBMISSION DATE:                                                                                                      May 5, 2010
                 SUBMITTED BY IDENTIFIER:
                   OVERALL BALLOT VOTE:          Negative




          Please be sure that your overall negative vote has supporting negative comments with
                                   explanations on the Ballot worksheet
                                                 Enter Ballot Comments (Line Items)                         Instructions




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Submitter]                                    1                                                                 March 2003
                                                             V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

                             BALLOT TITLE:       HL7 Version 3 Domain Analysis Model: Security, Release 1 (V3DAM_SECURITY_R1_I2_2010MAY) - 2nd
                                                 Informative Ballot


                           BALLOT CYCLE:         MAY 2010
                       SUBMITTED BY NAME:        Bernd Blobel
                      SUBMITTED BY EMAIL:        bernd.blobel@klinik.uni-regensburg.de
                                                 +49-941-944 6769
                      SUBMITTED BY PHONE:
            SUBMITTED BY ORGANIZATION (if        HL7 Germany
                              applicable):
                       SUBMISSION DATE:                                                                                                      May 5, 2010
                 SUBMITTED BY IDENTIFIER:
                   OVERALL BALLOT VOTE:          Negative




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Submitter]                                    2                                                                 March 2003
                                                               V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

                                                                                    Ballot Comment Submission

                                                                                             Vote
                                                                                             and
 Number     Ballot WG      Artifact   Artifact ID    Chapter   Section   Ballot   Pubs       Type Existing Wording                         Proposed Wording
          1 Security       ??         Page 8         Authors                      Yes          A-T Bloebel                                 Blobel
          2                ??         Page 8         DAM                                     Neg-Mj HL7 RIM-based information and          HL7 information and services
                                                                                                    services models.                       models.




          3                ??         Page 8         DAM                                     Neg-Mj A DAM may also be used to              A DAM may also be used to
                                                                                                    constrain other standards for use in   constrain other standards for use in
                                                                                                    healthcare (e.g. to constrain access   healthcare (e.g. to constrain access
                                                                                                    control markup standards).             control standards).




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                       3                                                                                        March 2003
                                                                   V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

         4                 ??        Page 9          Custodian                          Neg-Mj A custodian is defined as 'an            A custodian is in general a trustee,
                                                                                               individual or organization that          or specially a trusted person acting
                                                                                               collects, uses, or discloses Protected   on behalf of a patient, if he/she is
                                                                                               Information (PI) for the purposes of     unable to perform (children,
                                                                                               care and treatment, planning and         disabled persons).
                                                                                               management of the health system or
                                                                                               health research. Jurisdictional
                                                                                               legislation typically includes the
                                                                                               following entities: Health service
                                                                                               providers, i.e., persons who are
                                                                                               licensed or registered to provide
                                                                                               health services;
                                                                                               Federal/Provincial/Territorial
                                                                                               Minister and Department of Health
                                                                                               Regional Health Authorities (where
                                                                                               they exist); Hospitals and Nursing
                                                                                               Homes and other healthcare
                                                                                               facilities; Pharmacists and
                                                                                               pharmacies; Boards, agencies,
                                                                                               committees and other organizations
                                                                                               identified in regulations;
                                                                                               Affiliates/agents, e.g. employees;
                                                                                               volunteers, Cancer Board; Mental
                                                                                               Health Board, Ambulance Operators,
                                                                                               persons who maintain and
                                                                                               administer EHR systems. A
                                                                                               Custodian is also known as Trustee
                                                                                               Source. ' ACIET Glossary - [1]

         5                 ??        Page 9          Custodian                          Neg-Mj If the entire text is used, the          Some jurisdictional legislation
                                                                                               following wording should be              includes …
                                                                                               changed: Jurisdictional legislation
                                                                                               typically includes the following
                                                                                               entities:
         6                 ??        Page 11         Figure 1.1a                         A-T




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                  4                                                                                          March 2003
                                                                    V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

         7                 ??        Page 11         Figure 1.1a                           Neg-Mj




         8                 ??        Page 11         Section 1.1b                           A-T     … using a CompositePolicy              … using a CompositePolicy
                                                                                                    consisting Authorizations …            consisting of Authorizations …
         9                 ??        Page 14         Section 1.2b                Yes        A-S     The information systems that           The information systems that
                                                                                                    healthcare providers use must ensure   healthcare providers use must ensure
                                                                                                    policies are automatically enforced    policies which are automatically
                                                                                                    based on explicit, standards-based     enforced based on explicit,
                                                                                                    qualifiers of protected information    standards-based qualifiers of
                                                                                                    when they requesting information       protected information when they are
                                                                                                    from or disclosing information to      requesting information from or
                                                                                                    other organizations or covered         disclosing information to other
                                                                                                    entities.                              organizations or covered entities.

        10                 ??        Page 14         Figure 1.2b                            A-Q




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                     5                                                                                          March 2003
                                                                   V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

        11                 ??        Page 16         Diagram 1.3                        Neg-Mj




        12                 ??        Page 16         Giagram 1.3                         A-S




        13                 ??        Page 18         Figure 1.5                         Neg-Mj




        14                 ??        Page 26         OperationTy                         A-S
                                                     pe




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                  6                     March 2003
                                                                    V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

        15                 ??        Page 29         Authorizatio                        Neg-Mi LoA is relevant to authentication,     LoA is relevant to authentication,
                                                     nPolicy                                    authorization, and access control in   authorization, and access control.
                                                                                                an SOA environment.


        16                 ??        Page 34                                              A-S




        17                 ??        Page 41         Chapter 3.1                          A-S                                          An Actor can be any principal
                                                                                                                                       acting such as person, but also
                                                                                                                                       organization, system, device,
                                                                                                                                       application, component, etc.




        18                 ??        Page 45         Figure 3.2.2                         A-Q




        19                 ??        Page 41 and                                         Neg-Mj
                                     Page 53




        20                 ??        Page 56                                                                                           Implicit consent (tacit agreement) is
                                                                                                                                       a consent expressed by the
                                                                                                                                       acceptance of a process.




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                   7                                                                                         March 2003
                                                                   V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

        21                 ??        Page 62         Section 4.2


        22 Security                                                1.1b                 A-T   If security Policy and a
                                                                                              PrivacyPolicy

        23 Security                                                1.5                  A-S   p.21 (Under Patient) "private
                                                                                              attribute"



        24 Security                                                1.5                  A-Q   p.22 (Under Public Services type::
                                                                                              <Enumeration>
                                                                                              PublicCoverageType[0..1]

                                                                                              …by the electronic health records
                                                                                              that the policy. Example
        25 Security                                                1.5                  A-Q   p. 24 (under Grantee: Abstract)      This class is used to delegate a
                                                                                                                                   specific right to a grantee...such as a
                                                                                              This is used to disgnate who/what    client or clearinghouse)
                                                                                              has been…
        26 Security                                                1.5                  A-T   p. 24 (under Grantee: Abstract)      Clearinghouse may act AS an
                                                                                                                                   agent/proxy
                                                                                              Clearinghouse may act an
                                                                                              agent/proxy
        27 Security                                                1.5                  A-S   p. 24 (under PrivacyPolicy), p.30
                                                                                              (under CompositePolicy), etc

                                                                                              main/focal
        28 Security                                                1.5                  A-T   p.25 (under Functional Role)         remove "&amp"

                                                                                              from Organization B (when
                                                                                              Organization A &amp; B have
        29 Security                                                1.5                  A-T   p. 27 (under PermissionCatalog)      remove "style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">
                                                                                                                                   "
                                                                                              style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">The
                                                                                              permission catalog
        30 Security                                                1.5                  A-S   p. 29 (under AuthorizationPolicy)    separate out

                                                                                              positive/negative                    positive (or negative)
                                                                                              permitted/forbidden                  permitted (or forbidden)
                                                                                              obligations/refrain                  obligation (or refrain)
        31 Security                                                1.5                  A-T   p. 32 (under Policy: Abstract)

                                                                                              uri : : <Interface> URL[0…1]




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                  8                                                                                        March 2003
                                                                    V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

        32 Security                                                 3.2.3.b               A-Q     p.48 (under revokeConsent
                                                                                                  Directives

                                                                                                  correction/error
        33 Security                                                 3.2.3.b                       Privacy Policy Management system


        34 Security                                                 3.4.3                 A-S     p. 56 (under Request PHI with           change to "the permission/operation
                                                                                                  Explicit Consent                        type"

                                                                                                  the type of permission/operation
        35 Security                                                 4.1                   A-T     p. 58 (under AccessOperation)           illustrate the oded concept, not as a
                                                                                                                                          reference or implementation value
                                                                                                  illustrate the coded concept, not       set
                                                                                                  reference or implementation value
                                                                                                  set
        36 Security                                                 4.1                   A-S     p.59 (under                             change to: by accessing subject,
                                                                                                  ConfidentialityByAccessKind             role or relationship based rights.

                                                                                                  by accessing subject / role and
                                                                                                  relationship based rights
        37 Security                                                 4.1                   A-S     p. 61 (under Sensitivity)




        38 Security                                                 4.1                   A-C     p. 66 (under StructuralRoleCode)

                                                                                                  ASTM-1986-98
        39 Security                                                 Annex B               A-S     p. 81

                                                                                                  Personal Health record
                                                                                                  Personal Information
        40 Security                                  all                                 Neg-Mj




        41                           Page 7          Introduction                         A-T     This domain analysis model is           This domain analysis model is
                                                                                                  intended meet these challenges by       intended to meet these challenges by
                                                                                                  identifying the information and         identifying the information and
        42                                                                                A-S     individual client consent directives.   individual client privacy consent
                                                                                                                                          directives




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                   9                                                                                            March 2003
                                                                    V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

        43                           Page 8          DAM                                  A-S


        44                           Page 9          Consent                              A-S   Consent Directive                      Privacy Consent Directive
                                                     Directive



        45                           Page 9          Protected                            A-S   healthcare client.
                                                     Information




        46                           Page 7          Introduction                         A-T   The Domain Analysis Model focuses      The Domain Analysis Model
                                                                                                on the information required to         focuses on the information required
                                                                                                support the authorization and access   to
                                                                                                control use cases detailed in          support the authorization and access
                                                                                                Appendix A of this document.           control use cases detailed in Annex
                                                                                                                                       A of this document.
        47                           Page 10         Figure 1                             A-S




        48                           Page 10         1.1.a                                A-S




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                   10                                                                                       March 2003
                                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

        49                           Page 11         Figurre 1.1.a                         Neg-Mi




        50                           Page 14         Figure 1.2.a                           A-S



        51                           Page 14         Figure 1.2b                            A-S




        52                           Page 15                                                A-S     Clinical Document



        53                           Page 18         Figure 1.5                             A-S




        54                           Page 17         Section 1.5                            A-S     Information Analysis: Class
                                                                                                    Descriptions




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                    11                                          March 2003
                                                                   V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

        55                                           Section 1.5                         Neg-Mj




        56                           Page 19         ConsentDire                          A-S     reasonCode : : [1]
                                                     ctive                                        This attribute is used to specify the
                                                                                                  reason for revoking a Consent
                                                                                                  Directive, e.g., requested vs.
                                                                                                  correction/error. An error would
                                                                                                  be a discrepancy between the
                                                                                                  intent of Consent Directive (as
                                                                                                  communicated by the Consenter)
                                                                                                  and that which was entered into the
                                                                                                  Consent Directive Management
                                                                                                  System (CDMS).

        57                           Page 19         PublishedCo                          A-S     PublishedConsent
                                                     nsent                                        This specialization of the
                                                                                                  ConsentDirective class is used to
                                                                                                  describe a consent directive
                                                                                                  published to a registry. If a
                                                                                                  client’s consent directive is
                                                                                                  published, a URL/URI is made
                                                                                                  available for
                                                                                                  reference. The client may use this
                                                                                                  URI to allow providers access to the
                                                                                                  consent directive created by the
                                                                                                  consenter.
                                                                                                  uri : : <Primitive Type> String[1]
                                                                                                  If a specific consent directive (for a
                                                                                                  client) is published, this attribute
                                                                                                  provides the means to
                                                                                                  locate and download the consent
                                                                                                  directive from a registry.
        58                           Page 25                                              A-S     PublishedPrivacyPolicy
                                                                                                  This class encapsulates the
                                                                                                  location of a human-readable
                                                                                                  version of the Electronic Privacy
                                                                                                  Policy. The human-readable version
                                                                                                  is accessible to any authorized
                                                                                                  system and user via the supplied
                                                                                                  URI.
                                                                                                  uri : : <Primitive Type> String[0..1]
                                                                                                  The location of published policy.




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                  12                                                     March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

        59                           Page 20                               A-S   InformationObject
                                                                                 This class represents a reference to
                                                                                 specific type of information object
                                                                                 that may be referenced
                                                                                 by a policy or consent directive (e.g.,
                                                                                 document, order, etc.). This
                                                                                 information object refers to the types
                                                                                 of
                                                                                 objects that may be used in a
                                                                                 permission.
                                                                                 code : : <Enumeration>
                                                                                 ObjectCode[0..1]
                                                                                 Coded attribute that identifies the
                                                                                 type of object referenced in the
                                                                                 policy.
        60                           Page 22                               A-S   Operation Classes




        61                           Page 24                               A-S   purpose : : <Enumeration>
                                                                                 PurposeCode[0..1]
                                                                                 This attribute is used to specify
                                                                                 the purpose to permit a specific
                                                                                 type of action/operation
                                                                                 according to the policy. Example:
                                                                                 TREATMENT
        62                           Page 24                               A-S   obligationCode : : <Enumeration>
                                                                                 ObligationCode[0..1]
                                                                                 This coded attribute specifies a pre-
                                                                                 defined obligation associated with a
                                                                                 policy or consent.



        63                           Page 24                               A-S   sequence : : <Primitive Type>
                                                                                 Integer[1]
                                                                                 This attribute specifies the sequence
                                                                                 of a specific consent directive in the
                                                                                 Consent Directive




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    13                                                   March 2003
                                                                    V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

        64                           Page 27                                              A-T   PermissionCatalog                        PermissionCatalog
                                                                                                style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">The               The permission catalog specifies a
                                                                                                permission catalog specifies a set of    set of standard permissions. The
                                                                                                standard permissions. The                permission catalog is the subject of
                                                                                                permission catalog is the subject of     separate HL7 standards. This
                                                                                                separate HL7 standards. This             reference is intended to show it
                                                                                                reference is intended to show it         relates
                                                                                                relates                                  to the rest of the information classes
                                                                                                to the rest of the information classes   required to support the use cases.
                                                                                                required to support the use cases.

        65                           Page 27                                              A-S   allowedSensitivity : :
                                                                                                <Enumeration> Sensitivity[0..1]
                                                                                                Coded attribute that describes the
                                                                                                level sensitivity of the protected
                                                                                                information (including IIHI)
                                                                                                that the user may access or use.
                                                                                                Sensitivity is a characteristic of a
                                                                                                resource which implies its value or
                                                                                                importance.
        66                           Page 27         Role                                 A-S



        67                           Page 27         Role                                 A-S




        68                           Page 28         SecurityRole                         A-S



        69                           Page 29         Authoirizatio                        A-S
                                                     nPolicy




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                   14                                                                                           March 2003
                                                                    V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

        70                           Page 29         Authorizatio                          A-S     levelOfAssurance
                                                     nPolicy




        71                                           Section 2 &                           A-S
                                                     3



        72                           Page 41 and     Figure 2.3                           Neg-Mj
                                     Page 53         and Figure
                                                     3.3




        73 Security        DM                                                              A-T     IIHI               PI




        74 Security        DM                                                              A-C




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                   15                                    March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

        75 Security                                                        A-T

        76 Security                                                        A-S




        77
        78
        79
        80
        81
        82
        83
        84
        85
        86
        87
        88
        89
        90
        91
        92
        93



ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    16                    March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

        94
        95
        96
        97
        98
        99
       100
       101
       102
       103
       104
       105
       106
       107
       108
       109
       110
       111
       112
       113
       114
       115
       116
       117
       118
       119
       120
       121
       122
       123
       124
       125
       126
       127
       128
       129
       130
       131
       132
       133
       134
       135
       136
       137
       138
       139
       140



ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    17                    March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

       141
       142
       143
       144
       145
       146
       147
       148
       149
       150
       151
       152
       153
       154
       155
       156
       157
       158
       159
       160
       161
       162
       163
       164
       165
       166
       167
       168
       169
       170
       171
       172
       173
       174
       175
       176
       177
       178
       179
       180
       181
       182
       183
       184
       185
       186
       187



ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    18                    March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

       188
       189
       190
       191
       192
       193
       194
       195
       196
       197
       198
       199
       200
       201
       202
       203
       204
       205
       206
       207
       208
       209
       210
       211
       212
       213
       214
       215
       216
       217
       218
       219
       220
       221
       222
       223
       224
       225
       226
       227




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    19                    March 2003
                                                                  V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

                                                                                                                          Committee Resolution

                                        In person
                                        resolution   Comment                                        Disposition
 Comments                               requested    grouping   Disposition             Withdrawn   Committee     Disposition Comment         Responsible Person
                                                                Persuasive                                        Rio: Accept
As the RIM has been compiled by                                 Persuasive                                        The DAM is not RIM-based,
grouping existing HL7 messages                                                                                    remove the reference.
instead of reflecting the application
domains’ reality, the DAM with all
the correct claims mentioned in the                                                                               Rio: Accept
Introduction cannot be based on the
HL7 RIM, but has to appropriately
refer to domain ontologies. Mapping
between domain and the
communication standards ontologies
might be provided.

                                                                Persuasive                                        Use proposed wording


                                                                                                                  Rio: Accept




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                 20                                                                        March 2003
                                                       V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

Most of the given examples                           Persuasive with mod                      This model distinguishes an     Bernd Bloebel
wouldn't fit in a European realm.                                                             SDM from a custodian of PI.
The definition should be more                                                                 We should use another term or
neutral. We wouldn't call it Trustee                                                          "i.e. data controller" someone
Source either.                                                                                other than the patient. We will
                                                                                              remove the examples since they
                                                                                              are not valid in some regions.
                                                                                              Bernd


                                                                                              Rio: Accept




As this is an international DSTU,                    Persuasive                               Use proposed wording
we shouldn’t emphasize certain
jurisdictions and just say “


Obligation Policy has no                             Considered - Question Answered           It inherits all the associations of
association.                                                                                  its base class. It is a
                                                                                              specialization of BasicPolicy




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                21                                                          March 2003
                                                       V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

ISO 21298 defines Structural and                     Persuasive                               The "SecurityRole" was added
Functional Roles, not being                                                                   in response to the Jan ballot. To
restricted to security-related ones.                                                          be discussed with the WG. We
Security roles aren’t defined. In the                                                         will add specialization for
diagram, structural roles are meant.                                                          StructuralRole and
This has to be expressed                                                                      FunctionalRole. "SecurityRole"
accordingly. Of course, the                                                                   is "Role" and it is an abstract
specialization into structural and                                                            class. We will add
functional roles could be hidden just                                                         documentation to the
defining “Roles”. Then, it would be                                                           "SecurityRole" class indicating
valuable to mention that this is an                                                           it has specializations as
abstract class which is specialized in                                                        Functional and Structural.
FR and SR according to ISO 21298.
                                                                                              Rio: Add the classes “Structural
                                                                                              Role” and “Functional Role”
                                                                                              under “Role” in the diagram



                                                     Persuasive                               Rio: Accept

                                                     Persuasive                               Rio: Accept




All uses cases are related to                        Persuasive with mod                      The model will relate the use
information. What is addressed with                                                           case to information transfer in
the Use Case Transfer Patient Care?                                                           support of transfer of care/
                                                                                              "Patient Care Info Transfer"


                                                                                              Rio: Delete “Transfer Patient
                                                                                              Care”




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                         22                                                     March 2003
                                                       V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

Diagram 1.3 uses the original Role                   Persuasive with mod                      This represents the Privacy
class again. There should be a                                                                view-point already reviewed.
harmonization through all the                                                                 We will submit a DSTU change
diagrams.                                                                                     request to rename classes, we
                                                                                              will rename "SecurityRole" -->
                                                                                              "Role" as an abstract class with
                                                                                              Structural and Functional role
                                                                                              specializations.


                                                                                              Rio: Accept

Check the way of associating                         Considered - No action required          The "Grantee" is not an
policies to related actors as well as                                                         authority necessarily; may be a
the way actors have been specialized                                                          patient, SDM, or organization.
in Figure 1.3.                                                                                A Clearinghouse is not a
"Clearinghouse" is another                                                                    jurisdictional authority but an
"JurisdictionalOrganization", and                                                             aggregator for electronic
the "Grantee" is another "Authority"                                                          processing.
in Figure 1.3. The figure should be
corrected introducing all                                                                     Rio: Simplify Fig. 1.3, leave
associations and specializations in                                                           just “Provider Organization”,
the right way.                                                                                “Grantee”, “Jurisdictional
                                                                                              Organization” and delete the
                                                                                              other related classes from the
                                                                                              diagram
We have to carefully distinguish                     Not persuasive                           The PolicyProgramSource refers
between InformationReference to a                                                             to payment method, per the
PolicyAuthority and the                                                                       class definition. It is the
InformationReference to the                                                                   program that paid for the
TargetObject.                                                                                 services documented in the
The PolicyProgramSource is an                                                                 health information referenced by
authority defining its policy to be                                                           the "InfoRef" class.
followed and being embedded in a
certain framework (jurisdiction) for                                                          Rio: Group the “Information
policies. In so far, it is a                                                                  References” as proposed
specialization around the
"Authority" class on top of the
figure, while in the lower part the
target-related issues have been
placed.
In general, the OperationType                        Considered - No action required          Agreed/
describes the actions performed on
the target object.                                                                            Rio: Accept




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                     23                                        March 2003
                                                       V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

LoA is relevant for environments                     Persuasive                               Use proposed wording.
supporting both the messaging and
service-oriented paradigm.                                                                    Rio: Accept
Therefore, rewording of the
statement is recommended.
Page 34, 2nd line should be                          Persuasive                               Add missing wording
completed to
[In parameter]. Alternatively,                                                                Rio: Use [ ] in any case
“parameter” should always be
omitted to harmonize the
presentation.
The same holds for the
harmonization of the type of
brackets used, e.g. (,[.

An Actor could be any principal                      Persuasive                               Use proposed wording.
acting such as person, but also
organization, system, device,                                                                 Rio: Accept
application, component, etc.
This is clearly addressed by the
systems presented in the different
use cases.

Analogue to page 14: All uses cases                  Considered - Question Answered           Transferring care from one
are related to information. What is                                                           provider to another requires the
addressed with the Use Case                                                                   exchange of consents and PI.
Transfer Patient Care?                                                                        We will clarify this point in the
                                                                                              business viewpoint.

                                                                                              Rio: Accept
Having in mind that Consent is just                  Not persuasive                           Related objects can have
another Policy, Figure 2.3 Policy                                                             drastically different lifecycles.
Life Cycle should be harmonized
with Figure 3.3 Consent Directive                                                             Rio: Take “rejected” out, use
Life Cycle, thereby starting the term                                                         just one diagram
Cycle with a capital.
Either we can revise any policy, or
better, any changes should result in
a new policy.


In our context, we know that                         Pending input from submitter             Not sure what this comment
information exchange is an essential                                                          require
part of.
                                                                                              Rio: Accept




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                  24                                            March 2003
                                                       V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

Here, a reference to ISO 21298                       Persuasive                               Add reference as suggested.
Structural and functional roles
should be provided.                                                                           Rio: Accept
                                     No              Persuasive                               Fix typo

                                                                                              Rio: Accept
Clarify or ADD Definition of a       No              Persuasive                               "private" means not visible
private attribute. This is the only                                                           outside an instance. We will add
place it is used in the document. Do                                                          clarification here.
you mean to say privacy policy
attribute….?                                                                                  Rio: Accept
sentence cut-off.                    No              Persuasive                               Add example.

                                                                                              Rio: Accept



Could this be better expressed?      No              Persuasive                               Work with proposed wording.

                                                                                              Rio: Accept

                                     No              Persuasive                               Rio: Accept



recommend using EITHER main or No                    Persuasive                               "Focal" will be used.
focal, not both
                                                                                              Rio: Accept

                                     No              Persuasive                               Fix typo

                                                                                              Rio: Accept

                                     No              Persuasive                               Fix typo

                                                                                              Rio: Accept

                                     No              Persuasive                               Use proposed wording

                                                                                              Rio: Accept


should this be url (instead of uri )? No             Considered - Question Answered           URI is more generic. A URL is a
                                                                                              URI.

                                                                                              Rio: Accept




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                25                                             March 2003
                                                       V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

do you mean error correction?        No              Persuasive with mod                      We mean "revoked due to error"
                                                                                              we will clarify

                                                                                              Rio: Accept
nicely done.                         No              Considered - No action required          Thanks

                                                                                              Rio: Accept
to match wording in diagram          No              Persuasive with mod                      Will ensure that the diagram is
                                                                                              consistent with the caption

                                                                                              Rio: Accept
                                     No              Persuasive with mod                      Use "illustrate the coded
                                                                                              concept, not as a reference or
                                                                                              implementation value set"

                                                                                              Rio: Accept
                                     No              Persuasive                               Use proposed wording

                                                                                              Rio: Accept


add example                          No              Considered - No action required          Sample values are avaialble
                                                                                              already under each
                                                                                              specialization.

                                                                                              Rio: Accept
should be: ASTM E1986-09             No              Persuasive                               Rio: Accept


add acronym                          No              Persuasive                               Rio: Accept



This ballot is identified as a DSTU, Yes             Not related                              The WG and the TSC have
yet has no way for a claim of                                                                 approved this already. This
conformance. A DAM should be                                                                  comment is not related to the
informative.                                                                                  ballot content.

                                                                                              Rio: Not relevant
missing word 'to'                    No              Persuasive                               Fix typo


there are many different types of    No              Persuasive                               Use proposed wording
consent directives that are not in
scope for access controls (e.g.
DNR). We should always prepend
the word 'privacy'.



ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                     26                                       March 2003
                                                       V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

Did we not also use the HL7 EHR        No            Persuasive                               Add reference to the HL7 EHRS
Functional model in the modeling of                                                           Functional Model -
this DAM?                                                                                     Infrastructure Functions
there are many different types of      Yes           Persuasive                               Use proposed wording
consent directives that are not in
scope for access controls (e.g.
DNR). We should always prepend
the word 'privacy'.
the term client is not commonly        Yes           Persuasive                               Use proposed wording
used in the way we are using it. The
sentence given would easily be read
as the software that runs on a
workstation in a client/server
arrangement. We need to define it
better. I would prefer if we kept to
'consumer'.
There is no Appendix in this           Yes           Persuasive                               Use proposed wording
document, it is an Annex.




This figure is shown but not           Yes           Pending input from submitter             What is missing? There is a
explained. The component parts of                                                             description and a diagram
the diagram do make up the                                                                    illustrating the relationship
remainder of section 1. But never is                                                          between viewpoints.
Figure 1 explained as to why it is
drawn the way that it is.
For example why is Role-Based
Access Control Viewpoint explicitly
drawn?
Please explain what a jurisdication Yes              Not related                              There is nothing here about a
or organizational standpoint is. It is                                                        "jurisdictional viewpoint".
not clear to me why this is less than                                                         There are two viewpoints:
the whole Securty DAM.                                                                        business and engienering.
                                                                                              Perhaps we could add the
                                                                                              information view-point.




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                  27                                        March 2003
                                                       V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

These class hierarchy diagrams need Yes              Considered - Question Answered           The secuirity-related class
to be described. Even if the first                                                            hierarhy is further elaborated in
diagram was the only one described                                                            1.1.b.
in detail, this would be a big help.
Annex C seems to indicate that it                                                             Rio: Add: “The definition of
will describe the diagram types. But                                                          the classes appears in the
it doesn't even describe the diagram                                                          following sections.”
shown in Annex C.
Given that the diagraming is
inconsistent I can't determine if the
diagram is correct, and the diagrams
are the prime output of a DAM.


Privacy Policies can also refer to a Yes
specific Clinical Object by that
objects unique ID value (e.g.
Document Unique ID).
This diagram is not understandable. Yes              Persuasive                               The puprose of this diagram is
I can't understand half of the lines,                                                         to show the actors and use
and am very unclear as to why a                                                               cases. We will clarify this point.
healthcare provider is not the one
making the request for healthcare
records. The lead paragraph is
understandable, but doesn't seem to
have any relationship to the
diagram.

The section on "Clinical Document" Yes               Considered - Question Answered           It is related to the class in the
seems missplaced. It is not related to                                                        previous diagram 1.2.a. We will
any part around it.                                                                           clarify this relationship.

The rendering of the diagram causes Yes              Pending input from other WG              This would require to break the
th elines to cross in ways that are                                                           diagram into multiple diagrams
impossible to follow. Thus I can't                                                            or publish online.
determine if there are improper
linking or not.
This text should start a new major Yes               Considered - Question Answered           This section is part of the
section (H1) (e.g. section 2.0), as                                                           "Information Analysis"
from here on is an explaination of
the classes. This explaintion would
be very nice to have references to
from the earler figures in section 1.




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                 28                                              March 2003
                                                       V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

The Class Descriptions must explain Yes              Pending input from submitter             Not actionabe, not clear what is
the relationships to other classes.                                                           required since the the classe
The relationships between classes is                                                          already include descriptions for
the most important part of the                                                                associations.
DAM.
I am really unclear why a policy     Yes             Pending input from other WG              Rio: Reject, as the “Reason
would include the reason the policy                                                           Code” is needed
is revoked. This seems more like a
function than an attribute.
I recommend simply removing
reasonCode as unnecessary for the
DAM




the distinction given is that the      Yes           Considered - No action required          "Published" is not a state. A
consent is published. That is not a                                                           Published policy will have
new object type in a DAM, it is a                                                             additional attributes; this is why
state change.                                                                                 it is represented as a
I recommend we remove it as a                                                                 specialization.
standalone class, and incorporate
the uri into ConsentDirective                                                                 Rio: Accept




the distinction given is that the      Yes           Considered - No action required          "Published" is not a state. A
privacy policy is published. That is                                                          Published policy will have
not a new object type in a DAM, it                                                            additional attributes; this is why
is a state change.                                                                            it is represented as a
I recommend we remove it as a                                                                 specialization.
standalone class, and incorporate
the uri into privacy Policy

                                                                                              Rio: Accept, as this is just
                                                                                              another policy




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                     29                                          March 2003
                                                       V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

The text explains that this class    Yes             Considered - Question Answered           The definition is correct. We
represents a reference to a specific                                                          don’t' refere ot instances but to
"type" of information object. I                                                               types of info (e.g. Lab) not Lab
believe you mean to a "specific                                                               with order id 1224.
object", not a 'specific type of
object'. We do need the idea of a
policy being specific to a specific
object instance (such as a specific                                                           Rio: Accept
psych note).
If a 'specific type of object' is
needed this should be represented as
an attribute of the
InformationReference, not as an
reference to a different class..
Why are these operations              Yes            Considered - Question Answered           Thease are specializations a
represented as their own classes and                                                          generic action.
not as attributes of Operation Class?
These seem out of place.                                                                      Rio: Leave as is (decomposition
                                                                                              of classes)
How is a policy indicated that has     Yes           Considered - Question Answered           The value of the "purpose"
different behavors for different                                                              attribute specifies the purpose
purpose codes?
                                                                                              Rio: Leave as is



obligation is a class. It can't be both Yes          Considered - Question Answered           ObligationCode is an
an attribute and a class.                                                                     enumeration, ObligationPolicy
                                                                                              is the class, obligationCode is a
                                                                                              coded attribute.

                                                                                              Rio: Accept. In general: Privacy
                                                                                              policies are not restricted to
                                                                                              obligations.
What is a sequence? The idea that      Yes           Persuasive                               Remove attribute
policies are to be evaluated in a
specific sequence is not consistent                                                           Rio: Accept
with the abstraction of modeling a
DAM.
Recommend removing this.




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                30                                              March 2003
                                                       V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

typo - inclusino of font style text.   Yes           Persuasive                               Fix typo




This is inconsistent with how we       Yes           Not persuasive                           This is consistent with HL7 V3.
have used senstivity and
confidentiality elsewhere.
Remove




There seems to be duplicate            Yes           Persuasive with mod                      Remove class, not in use at this
attributes (identity and roleId)                                                              time.

                                                                                              Rio: Leave as is
a role should not be allowed to have Yes             Persuasive with mod                      Remove class, not in use at this
both a functional role identified and                                                         time.
a structural role. There should be a
rule that a role is either a functional
or structural type. Which means we
need to have an attribute to hold this
enum.

How is this different or similar to   Yes            Considered - Question Answered           This class was added as a result
role? We should only have one.                                                                of the Jan ballot as approved
Given this is a DAM, I choose                                                                 during the peer review.
simple ROLE.
It is unclear how an                  Yes            Considered - Question Answered           It supports different attributes,
AuthorizationPolicy is different than                                                         serves a different purpose, etc..
any other policy. Is it really
necessary? Why?




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                31                                              March 2003
                                                       V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

This seems oddly placed. I would     Yes             Considered - Question Answered           This is an attribute of
expect LOA to be an attribute of the                                                          AuthorizationPolicy intended to
UserIdentity, not specifically                                                                distinguish this type of policy
AuthorizationPolicy. I however                                                                from other types of policies. See
think that LOA is not well enough                                                             #71.
demanded by use-cases at this time
and would be better to not be
included anywhere in this DAM.

This whole section has little to do    Yes           Considered - Question Answered           A DAM is not limited to
with a DAM, and more to do with                                                               information analysis. Refer to
services that might support security                                                          the HDF for more details
access controls. This section seems
unnecessary
These life-cycles are different with Yes             Not persuasive with mod                  Diagram 2.3 is based on the
no good reason. There should be                                                               PASS diagram. Perhaps we
only one lifecycle that is applicable                                                         should not ninclude it here.
to both security policies and privacy                                                         Regarding diagram 3.3, it is
policies.                                                                                     consistent with Privacy DAM. If
* Figure 2.3 has unnecessary states                                                           an implementer does not support
'rejected' and 'terminated'. The state                                                        a specific transition (e.g.
transitions are needed, but the states                                                        revision) that is fine but the use
are indistinguishable and                                                                     cases analyzed allowed for a
unnecessary.                                                                                  client to revise their consent.
* Figure 3.3 allows for revision. A                                                           Diagram 3.3 is correct but it
revision is related to the previous                                                           supports a superset of
policy, but is it-self a new policy.                                                          transitions.
* Neither diagram is correct.
* the diagram needs to be described


Throughout the document we refer                     Persuasive with mod                      IIHI is used in the use cases. If it
to IIHI when we decided to refer to                                                           appears anywhere else, we will
the more general 'Protected                                                                   make sure every occurrence of
Information'. There are a few cases,                                                          IIHI is correct.
such as examples or scenarios where
IIHI is still appropriate, but most
should be changes.

There is still a significant number of               Persuasive
places where the language is
redundant and there are gramatical
and spelling errors. These non-
substantive edits should be made
without requirement for discussion
or vote.




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                32                                                 March 2003
                                                       V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

There are a number of minor typos                    Persuasive
to fix.
 Also, the DAM seems to be                           Considered - Question Answered           The DAM reflects the use cases
Healthcare PROVIDER centric.                                                                  identified in the Annex
Across the board, all references to
organizations that use, collect,
access, disclose health information
is about Provider Organizations,
even though there are many other
organizations that also collect,
access, use and disclose health
information, and that use HL7
standards, such as health plans. For
example, on page 23 , under
"Privacy Policy Classes", the
"Authority: Abstract" class states
that "...this abstract class is used to
designate the authority that issues
the policy. Authority is an
organization (either Jurisdictional or
PROVIDER) that is responsible for
the Privacy Policy...". The word
'Provider' in this context constrains
the Authority entity to providers,
when there are other organizations,
such as health plans, that are also
Authority entities that issue,
maintain, and execute/exercise
privacy policies.




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                33                                           March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    34                    March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    35                    March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    36                    March 2003
                                                                    V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

                                                                                                          Ballot Comment Tracking
         Against


                   Abstain
                                                                      Organization
                             Change    Substantive                                                  On Behalf of   Submitter
  For




                             Applied   Change        Submitted By                    On behalf of   Email          Tracking ID Referred To   Received From
                                                     Bernd Blobel     HL7 Germany




                                                     Bernd Blobel     HL7 Germany




                                                     Bernd Blobel     HL7 Germany




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                        37                                                                 March 2003
                                                               V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




                                                Bernd Blobel     HL7 Germany




                                                Bernd Blobel     HL7 Germany



                                                Bernd Blobel     HL7 Germany




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                              38                    March 2003
                                                               V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




                                                Bernd Blobel     HL7 Germany




                                                Bernd Blobel     HL7 Germany




                                                Bernd Blobel     HL7 Germany




                                                Bernd Blobel     HL7 Germany




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                              39                    March 2003
                                                               V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




                                                Bernd Blobel     HL7 Germany




                                                Bernd Blobel     HL7 Germany




                                                Bernd Blobel     HL7 Germany




                                                Bernd Blobel     HL7 Germany




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                              40                    March 2003
                                                               V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form



                                                Bernd Blobel     HL7 Germany




                                                Bernd Blobel     HL7 Germany




                                                Bernd Blobel     HL7 Germany




                                                Bernd Blobel     HL7 Germany




                                                Bernd Blobel     HL7 Germany




                                                Bernd Blobel     HL7 Germany




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                              41                    March 2003
                                                               V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form


                                                Bernd Blobel     HL7 Germany


                                                                 US Department of Suzanne         Suzanne.Gonzale
                                                Freida Hall
                                                                 Veterans Affairs Gonzales-Webb   s-Webb@va.gov


                                                                 US Department of Suzanne         Suzanne.Gonzale
                                                Freida Hall
                                                                 Veterans Affairs Gonzales-Webb   s-Webb@va.gov




                                                                 US Department of Suzanne         Suzanne.Gonzale
                                                Freida Hall
                                                                 Veterans Affairs Gonzales-Webb   s-Webb@va.gov



                                                                 US Department of Suzanne         Suzanne.Gonzale
                                                Freida Hall
                                                                 Veterans Affairs Gonzales-Webb   s-Webb@va.gov


                                                                 US Department of Suzanne         Suzanne.Gonzale
                                                Freida Hall
                                                                 Veterans Affairs Gonzales-Webb   s-Webb@va.gov


                                                                 US Department of Suzanne         Suzanne.Gonzale
                                                Freida Hall
                                                                 Veterans Affairs Gonzales-Webb   s-Webb@va.gov


                                                                 US Department of Suzanne         Suzanne.Gonzale
                                                Freida Hall
                                                                 Veterans Affairs Gonzales-Webb   s-Webb@va.gov


                                                                 US Department of Suzanne         Suzanne.Gonzale
                                                Freida Hall
                                                                 Veterans Affairs Gonzales-Webb   s-Webb@va.gov



                                                                 US Department of Suzanne         Suzanne.Gonzale
                                                Freida Hall
                                                                 Veterans Affairs Gonzales-Webb   s-Webb@va.gov



                                                                 US Department of Suzanne         Suzanne.Gonzale
                                                Freida Hall
                                                                 Veterans Affairs Gonzales-Webb   s-Webb@va.gov




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                    42                            March 2003
                                                               V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form


                                                                 US Department of Suzanne         Suzanne.Gonzale
                                                Freida Hall
                                                                 Veterans Affairs Gonzales-Webb   s-Webb@va.gov


                                                                 US Department of Suzanne         Suzanne.Gonzale
                                                Freida Hall
                                                                 Veterans Affairs Gonzales-Webb   s-Webb@va.gov


                                                                 US Department of Suzanne         Suzanne.Gonzale
                                                Freida Hall
                                                                 Veterans Affairs Gonzales-Webb   s-Webb@va.gov



                                                                 US Department of Suzanne         Suzanne.Gonzale
                                                Freida Hall
                                                                 Veterans Affairs Gonzales-Webb   s-Webb@va.gov



                                                                 US Department of Suzanne         Suzanne.Gonzale
                                                Freida Hall
                                                                 Veterans Affairs Gonzales-Webb   s-Webb@va.gov



                                                                 US Department of Suzanne         Suzanne.Gonzale
                                                Freida Hall
                                                                 Veterans Affairs Gonzales-Webb   s-Webb@va.gov


                                                                 US Department of Suzanne         Suzanne.Gonzale
                                                Freida Hall
                                                                 Veterans Affairs Gonzales-Webb   s-Webb@va.gov


                                                                 US Department of Suzanne         Suzanne.Gonzale
                                                Freida Hall
                                                                 Veterans Affairs Gonzales-Webb   s-Webb@va.gov




                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare



                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                    43                            March 2003
                                                               V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form


                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare



                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                               44                   March 2003
                                                               V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                               45                   March 2003
                                                               V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form



                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                               46                   March 2003
                                                               V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                               47                   March 2003
                                                               V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare



                                                John Moehrke     GE Healthcare




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                               48                   March 2003
                                                                   V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




                                                John Moehrke         GE Healthcare




                                                John Moehrke         GE Healthcare




                                                John Moehrke         GE Healthcare




                                                Bill Braithwaite




                                                Bill Braithwaite




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                   49                   March 2003
                                                                V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form


                                                Walter Suarez     Kaiser Permanente




                                                Walter Suarez     Kaiser Permanente




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                                    50               March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    51                    March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    52                    March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    53                    March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




 Notes




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    54                    March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    55                    March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    56                    March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    57                    March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    58                    March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    59                    March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    60                    March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    61                    March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    62                    March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    63                    March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    64                    March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    65                    March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    66                    March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    67                    March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    68                    March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    69                    March 2003
                                                     V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Ballot]                    70                    March 2003
                                                 Ballot Submission/Resolution Instructions

                                                                                                                                    Return to Ballot
  How to Use this Spreadsheet
  Submitting a ballot:

  SUBMITTER WORKSHEET:
  Please complete the Submitter worksheet noting your overall ballot vote. Please note if you have any negative line items, the ballot is considered
  negative overall. For Organization and Benefactor members, the designated contact must be one of your registered voters to conform with
  ANSI guidelines.

  BALLOT WORKSHEET:
  Please complete all lavender columns as described below - columns in turquoise are for the committees to complete when reviewing ballot
  comments.
  Several columns utilize drop-down lists of valid values, denoted by a down-arrow to the right of the cell. Some columns utilize a filter which
  appears as a drop down in the gray row directly below the column header row.
  If you need to add a row, please do so near the bottom of the rows provided.
  If you encounter issues with the spreadsheet, please contact Karen VanHentenryck (karenvan@hl7.org) at HL7 Headquarters.

  Resolving a ballot:
  Please complete all green columns as described below - columns in blue are for the ballot submitters.
  You are required to send resolved ballots back to the ballot submitter, as denoted by the Submitter worksheet.

  Submitting comments on behalf of another person:
  You can cut and paste other peoples comments into your spreadsheet and manually update the column titled "On behalf of" or you
  can use a worksheet with the amalgamation macro in it (available from HL7 Inc. or HL7 Canada (hl7canada@cihi.ca)). The
  amalgamation worksheet contains the necessary instructions to automatically populate the 'submitter', 'organization' and
  'on behalf of' columns. This is very useful for organizational members or international affiliates who have one representative
  for ballot comments from a number of different people.




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Instructions]                                                                                               August, 2002
                                           Ballot Submission/Resolution Instructions

  Column Headers
                                              Ballot Submitter (sections in lavender)

  Number                  This is an identifier used by HL7 Committees. Please do not alter.
  Ballot WG               Select the WG from the drop down list that will best be able to resolve the ballot comment.

                          In some situations, the ballot comment is general in nature and can best be resolved by a non-chapter
                          specific WG. This can include MnM (Modeling and Methodology) & INM (Infrastructure and
                          Management). Enter these WGs if you feel the ballot can best be resolved by these groups. In some
                          situations, chapter specific WGs such as OO (Observation and Orders) and FM (Financial Management)
                          will refer ballot comments to these WGs if they are unable to resolve the ballot comment. An explanation
                          of the 'codes' used to represent the Ballot WGs as well as the Ballots they are responsible for is included in
                          the worksheet titled 'CodeReference'
  Artifact                The type of Artifact this Change affects.
                          HD            Hierarchical Message Definition
                          AR            Application Roles
                          RM            Refined Message Information Model
                          IN            Interaction
                          TE            Trigger Event
                          MT            Message Type
                          DM            Domain Message Information Model
                          ST            Storyboard
                          ??            Other


  Section                 Section of the ballot, e.g., 3.1.2. Note: This column can be filtered by the committee, for example, to
                          consider all ballot line items reported against section 3.1.2.
  Ballot                  A collection of artifacts including messages, interactions, & storyboards that cover a specific interest area.
                          Examples in HL7 are Pharmacy, Medical Devices, Patient Administration, Lab Order/Resulting, Medical
                          Records, and Claims and Reimbursement.

                          Select from the drop down list the specific ballot that the comment pertains to. An explanation of the
                          'codes' used to represent the Ballots as well as the Ballot WGs that are are responsible for them is
                          included in the worksheet titled 'CodeReference'. Please refer to the list of available ballots on the HL7
                          site for more descriptive information on current, open ballots.
  Pubs                    If the submitter feels that the issue being raised directly relates to the formatting or publication of this
                          document rather than the content of the document, flag this field with a "Y" value, otherwise leave it blank
                          or "N".


ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Instructions]                                                                                   August, 2002
                                            Ballot Submission/Resolution Instructions

  Vote/Type               Negative Votes:

                          1. (Neg-Mj) Negative Vote with reason , Major. Use this in the situation where the content of the material is
                          non-functional, incomplete or requires correction before final publication. All Neg-Mj votes must be
                          resolved by committee.

                          2. (Neg-Mi) Negative Vote with reason, Minor Type. Use this when the comment needs to be resolved, but
                          is not as significant as a negative major.

                          Affirmative Votes:

                          3. (A-S) Affirmative Vote with Comment - Suggestion. Use this if the committee is to consider a
                          suggestion such as additional background information or justification for a particular solution.

                          4. (A-T) Affirmative Vote with Comment - Typo. If the material contains a typo such as misspelled words,
                          enter A-T.

                          5. (A-Q) Affirmative Vote with Question.

                          6. (A-C) Affirmative Vote with Comment.
  Existing Wording        Copy and Paste from ballot materials.
  Proposed Wording        Denote desired changes.

                          Reason for the Change. In the case of proposed wording, a note indicating where the changes are in the
  Comments
                          proposed wording plus a reason would be beneficial for the WG reviewing the ballot.
  In Person Resolution    Submitters can use this field to indicate that they would appreciate discussing particular comments in
  Required?               person during a WG Meeting. Co-Chairs can likewise mark this field to indicate comments they think
                          should be discussed in person. Please note that due to time constraints not all comments can be reviewed
                          at WGMs.




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Instructions]                                                                                  August, 2002
                                           Ballot Submission/Resolution Instructions

                                          Committee Resolution (sections in turquoise)
  Comment Grouping        This is a free text field that WGs can use to track similar or identical ballot comments. For example, if a
                          committee receives 10 identical or similar ballot comments the WG can place a code (e.g. C1) in this
                          column beside each of the 10 ballot comments. The WG can then apply the sort filter to view all of the
                          similar ballot comments at the same time.
  Disposition             The instructions for selecting dispositions were too large for this section and have been moved to the
                          worksheet titled "Instructions Cont.."




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Instructions]                                                                                August, 2002
                                             Ballot Submission/Resolution Instructions

  Withdraw                 Withdraw
  (Negative Ballots        This code is used when the submitter agrees to "Withdraw" the negative line item. The Process
  Only)                    Improvement Committee is working with HL7 Headquarters to clarify the documentation on 'Withdraw" in
                           the HL7 Governance and Operations Manual. To help balloters and co-chairs understand the use of
                           "Withdraw", the following example scenarios have been included as examples of when "Withdraw" might
                           be used: 1) the WG has agreed to make the requested change, 2) the WG has agreed to make the
                           requested change, but with modification; 3) the WG has found the requested change to be persuasive but
                           out-of scope for the particular ballot cycle and encourages the ballotter to submit the change for the next
                           release; 4) the WG has found the requested change to be non-persuasive and has convinced the
                           submitter. If the negative ballotter agrees to "Withdraw" a negative line item it must be recorded in the
                           ballot spreadsheet.

                           The intent of this field is to help manage negative line items, but the WG may elect to manage affirmative
                           suggestions and typos using this field if they so desire.

                           This field may be populated based on the ballotter's verbal statement in a WGM, in a teleconference or
                           in a private conversation with a WG co-chair. The intention will be documented in minutes as appropriate
                           and on this ballot spreadsheet. The entry must be dated if it occurs outside of a WGM or after the
                           conclusion of WGM.

                           The field will be left unpopulated if the ballotter elects to not withdraw or retract the negative line item.

                           Note that a ballotter often withdraws a line item before a change is actually applied. The WG is obliged
                           to do a cross check of the Disposition field with the Change Applied field to ensure that they have
                           finished dealing with the line item appropriately.

                           Retract
                           The ballotter has been convinced by the WG to retract their ballot item. This may be due to a
                           decision to make the change in a future version or a misunderstanding about the content.

                        NOTE: If the line item was previously referred, but withdrawn or retracted once the line item is dealt with
                        in the subsequent WG update the disposition as appropriate when the line item is resolved.
  Disposition Committee If the Disposition is "Refer", then select the WG that is ultimately responsible for resolving the ballot
                        comment. Otherwise, leave the column blank. If the Disposition is "Pending" for action by another WG,
                        select the appropriate WG.




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Instructions]                                                                                   August, 2002
                                            Ballot Submission/Resolution Instructions

  Disposition Comment Enter a reason for the disposition as well as the context. Some examples from the CQ WG include:
                      20030910 CQ WGM: The request has been found Not Persuasive because....
                      20031117 CQ Telecon: The group agreed to the proposed wording.
                      20031117 CQ Telecon: Editor recommends that proposed wording be accepted.


  Responsible Person       Identifies a specific person in the WG (or disposition WG) that will ensure that any accepted changes are
                           applied to subsequent materials published by the WG (e.g. updating storyboards, updating DMIMs, etc.).

  For, Against, Abstain    In the event votes are taken to aid in your line item resolutions, there are three columns available for the
                           number of each type of vote possible, for the proposed resolution, against it or abstain from the vote.
  Change Applied           A Y/N indicator to be used by the WG chairs to indicate if the Responsible Person has indeed made the
                           proposed change and submitted updated materials to the committee.
                           A Y/N indicator to be used by the WG chairs to indicate if the line item is a substantive change.
  Substantive Change       NOTE: This is a placeholder in V3 pending definition of substantive change by the ArB.
                           This column is auto filled from the Submitter Worksheet. It is used to refer back to the submitter for a
                           given line item when all the ballot line items are combined into a single spreadsheet or database. For
                           Organization and Benefactor members, the designated contact must be one of your registered voters to
  Submitted By             conform with ANSI guidelines.
                           This column is auto filled from the Submitter Worksheet. Submitter's should enter the name of the
                           organization that they represent with respect to voting if different from the organization that they are
                           employed by. It is used to link the submitter's name with the organization they are voting on behalf of for a
  Organization             given line item when all the ballot line items are combined into a single spreadsheet or database.
                         This column is autofilled from the Submitter Worksheet. It is used to track the original submitter of the line
                         item. Many International Affiliates, Organizational, and Benefactor balloters pool comments from a variety
  On Behalf Of           of reviewers, which can be tracked using this column.
                         This column is autofilled from the Submitter Worksheet. It is used to track the email address of the original
                         submitter of the line item. Many International Affiliates, Organizational, and Benefactor balloters pool
  On Behalf Of Email     comments from a variety of reviewers, which can be tracked using this column.
  Submitter Tracking ID #Internal identifier (internal to the organization submitting the ballot). This should be a meaningful number
                         to the organization that allows them to track comments. This can be something as simple as the
                         reviewer’s initials followed by a number for each comment, i.e. JD-1, or even more complex such as
                         ‘001XXhsJul03’ where ‘001’ is the unique item number, ‘XX’ is the reviewer's initials, ‘hs’ is the company


  Referred To              Use this column to indicate the WG you have referred this ballot comment to.



ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Instructions]                                                                                   August, 2002
                                           Ballot Submission/Resolution Instructions

  Received From           Use this column to indicate the WG from which you have received this ballot comment.
                          This is a free text field that WGs can use to add comments regarding the current status of referred or
  Notes                   received item.




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Instructions]                                                                           August, 2002
                                          Ballot Submission/Resolution Instructions




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Instructions]                              August, 2002
                                          Ballot Submission/Resolution Instructions




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Instructions]                              August, 2002
                                             Ballot Submission/Resolution Instructions

                                                                                                         Back to ballot           Back to instructions
Ballot instructions continued...
For the column titled "Disposition" please select one of the following:

Applicable to All Ballot Comments (Affirmative and Negative)
1. Persuasive. The WG has accepted the ballot comment as submitted and will make the appropriate change in the next ballot cycle. At this point the
comment is considered withdrawn and the corresponding cell from the column titled ‘Withdrawn’ should be marked appropriately. Section 14.08.01.03
of the HL7 Governance and Operations Manual (GOM) states that if a ballot comment is to be withdrawn that “…the Work Group effecting reconciliation
agrees without objection that the poistion expressed by the negative response is persuasive” and therefore WGs must take a vote to accept the
comment as persuasive.

2. Persuasive with Mod. The WG believes the ballot comment has merit, but has changed the proposed solution given by the voter. Example
scenarios include, but are not limited to;
-The WG has accepted the intent of the ballot comment, but has changed the proposed solution
-The WG has accepted part of the ballot comment, and will make a change to the standard; the other part is not persuasive
-The WG has accepted part of the ballot comment, and will make a change to the standard; the other part may be persuasive but is out of scope
The standard will be changed accordingly in the next ballot cycle. The nature of, or reason for, the modification is reflected in the Disposition Comments.
At this point the comment is considered withdrawn and the corresponding cell from the column titled ‘Withdrawn’ should be marked appropriately.
Section 14.08.01.03 of the HL7 Governance and Operations Manual (GOM) states that if a ballot comment is to be withdrawn that “…the Work Group
effecting reconciliation agrees without objection that the poistion expressed by the negative response is persuasive” and therefore WGs must take a
vote to accept the comment as persuasive.

3. Not Persuasive. The WG does not believe the ballot comment has merit or is unclear. Section 14.08.01.02 of the HL7 GOM states that “Approval of
a motion to declare a negative response not persuasive shall require an affirmative vote of at least sixty percent (60%) of the combined affirmative and
negative votes cast by the Work Group during reconciliation.” A change will not be made to the standard or proposed standard. The WG must indicate a
specific reason why the ballot comment is rejected in the Disposition Comments. The ballot submitter has the option to appeal this decision following
HL7 procedures as defined in section 14.12 of the HL7 GOM.
Example scenarios include, but are not limited to;
- the submitter has provided a recommendation or comment that the WG does not feel is valid
- the submitter has not provided a recommendation/solution; the submitter is encouraged to submit a proposal for a future ballot
- the recommendation/solution provided by the submitter is not clear; the submitter is encouraged to submit a proposal for a future ballot

4. Not Persuasive with Mod. The comment was considered non-persuasive by the WG; however, the WG has agreed to make a modification to the
material based on this comment. For example, adding additional explanatory text. Additional changes suggested by the non-persuaive comment will
not be made to the standard or proposed standard. The WG must indicate a specific reason why the ballot comment is rejected in the Disposition
Comments. The ballot submitter has the option to appeal this decision following HL7 procedures as defined in section 14.12 of the HL7 GOM.

5. Not Related. The WG has determined that the ballot comment is not relevant to the domain at this point in the ballot cycle. Section 14.08.01.01 of
the HL7 GOM states that “Approval of a motion to declare a negative response not related shall require an affirmative vote of at least sixty percent
(60%) of the combined affirmative and negative votes cast by the Work Group during reconciliation.” Example scenarios include, but are not limited to;


ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Instructions Cont..]                                                                               August, 2002
                                            Ballot Submission/Resolution Instructions
(60%) of the combined affirmative and negative votes cast by the Work Group during reconciliation.” Example scenarios include, but are not limited to;
- the submitter is commenting on a portion of the standard, or proposed standard, that is not part of the current ballot
- the submitter's comments may be persuasive but beyond what can be accomplished at this point in the ballot cycle without creating potential
controversy.
- the submitter is commenting on something that is not part of the domain

6. Referred and Tracked. This should be used in circumstances when a comment was submitted to your WG in error and should have been submitted
to another WG. If you use this disposition you should also select the name of the WG you referred the comment to under the Column "Referred To".

7. Pending Input from Submitter. This should be used when the WG has read the comment but didn't quite understand it or needs to get more input
from the submitter. By selecting "Pending Input from Submitter" the WG can track and sort their dispositions more accurately.

8. Pending Input from other WG. The WG has determined that they cannot give the comment a disposition without further input or a final decision
from another WG. This should be used for comments that do belong to your WG but require a decision from another WG, such as ArB or MnM.

Applicable only to Affirmative Ballot Comments
9. Considered for future use. The WG, or a representative of the WG (editor or task force), has reviewed the item and has determined that no change
will be made to the standard at this point in time. This is in keeping with ANSI requirements. The reviewer should comment on the result of the ballot
comment consideration. An Example comment is included here:
- the suggestion is persuasive, but outside the scope of the ballot cycle; the submitter is encouraged to submit a proposal to the WG using the agreed
upon procedures.

10. Considered-Question answered. The WG, or a representative of the WG (editor or task force), has reviewed the item and has answered the
question posed. In so doing, the WG has determined that no change will be made to the standard at this point in time. This is in keeping with ANSI
requirements.

11. Considered-No action required. Occasionally people will submit an affirmative comment that does not require an action. For example, some WG's
have received comments of praise for a job well done. This comment doesn't require any further action on the WG's part, other than to keep up the
good work.




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Instructions Cont..]                                                                            August, 2002
                                                           Ballot Submission/Resolution Instructions




      int the

econciliation




n Comments.




            of

ust indicate a




                 ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Instructions Cont..]                       August, 2002
                                                         Ballot Submission/Resolution Instructions




en submitted


 more input




at no change




, some WG's




               ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Instructions Cont..]                       August, 2002
                                                                V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form


   Note on entering large bodies of text:
   ------------------------------------------------------------------
   When entering a large body of text in an Excel spreadsheet cell:

   1) The cell is pre-set to word wrap

   2) You can expand the column if you would like to see more of the available data

   3) There is a limit to the amount of text you can enter into a "comment" text column so keep things brief.
      -For verbose text, we recommend a separate word document; reference the file name here and include it (zipped) with your ballot.

   4) To include a paragraph space in your lengthly text, use Alt + Enter on your keyboard.

   5) To create "bullets", simply use a dash "-" space for each item you want to
   "bullet" and use two paragraph marks between them (Alt + Enter as described
   above).
   ------------------------------------------------------------------




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Format Guidelines]                         84                                                 March 2003
                                                                V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Format Guidelines]                    85                    March 2003
                                                              V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form


  Note: This section is a placeholder for Q&A/Helpful Hints for ballot resolution. (These notes are from Cleveland Co-Chair meeting; needs to be edited, or replaced by use cases)

  Marked ballots
  Issue For second and subsequent membership ballots HL7 ballots only the substantive changes that were added since the last ballot, with the instructions that ballots returned on unmarked ite
  “not related”. How do you handle obvious errors that were not marked, for example, the address for an external reference (e.g. DICOM) is incorrect?
  Response You can correct the obvious typographical errors as long as it is not a substantive change, even if it is unmarked. We recommend conservation interpretation of “obvious error” as
  make a change that will questioned, or perceived to show favoritism. If you are unclear if the item is an “obvious error” consult the TSC Chair or ARB.
  Comment With the progression of ballots from Committee - > Membership the closer you get to final member ballot, the more conservative you should be in adding content. In the early stag
  ballot, it may be acceptable to adding new content (if endorsed by the committee) as wider audiences will review/critique in membership ballot. The Bylaws require two levels of ballot for n
  to Section 14.01). Exceptions must approved by the TSC Char.

  Non-persuasive
  Issue Use with discretion· Attempt to contact the voter before you declare their vote non-persuasive· Fixing a problem (e.g. typo) in effect makes the negative vote non-persuasive.· In all cas
  be informed of the TC’s action.
  Response The preferred outcome is for the voter to withdraw a negative ballot; It is within a chair’s prerogative to declare an item non-persuasive. However, it does not make sense to decla
  without attempting to contact the voter to discuss why you are declaring non-persuasive. If you correct a typo, the item is no longer (in effect) non-persuasive once you have adopted their re
  change, however the voter should then willingly withdraw their negative as you have made their suggestion correction.. In all cases, you must inform the voter.
  Comment


  Non-related
  Issue Use with discretion· Used, for example, if the ballot item is out of scope, e.g. on a marked ballot the voter has submitted a comment on an area not subject to vote.· Out of scope items
  Response
  Comment


  Non-standard ballot responses are received
  Issue The ballot spreadsheet allows invalid combination, such as negative typo.
  Response Revise the ballot spreadsheets to support only the ANSI defined votes, plus “minor” and “major” negative as requested by the committees for use as a management tool. Question
  Suggestion will be retained
  Comment Separate Affirmative/Abstain and Negative ballots will be created. Affirmative ballots will support: naffirmativenaffirmative with commentnaffirmative with comment
  comment – suggestionnabstainNegative ballots will support:nnegative with reason – majornnegative with reason – minorNote: “major” “minor” need definition

  Substantive changes must be noted in ballot reconciliation
  Issue Who determines whether a ballot goes forward?
  Response Substantive changes in a member ballot will result in a subsequent ballot. These should be identified on the ballot reconciliation form. (Refer to Bylaws 15.07.03). The TSC Chai
  whether the ballot goes forward to another member ballot, or back to committee ballot.
  Comment · Co-chairs and Editors need a working knowledge of “substantive change” as defined on the Arb website.·

  What Reconciliation Documentation Should Be Retained?
  Issue · By-Laws Section 14.04.01 states: “All comments accompanying affirmative ballots shall be considered by the Technical Committee.” This means each line item must be reviewed. Y
  disposition "considered" to mark affirmative comments that have been reviewed. Committees are encouraged to include in the comment section what they thing of the affirmative comment a
  they think action should be taken, and by who.

ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Co-Chair Guidelines]                         86                                                                              March 2003
                                                              V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

  they think action should be taken, and by who.
  Response ·
  Comment


  How do you handle negatives without comment?
  Issue How do you handle a negative ballot is submitted without comments?
  Response The co-chair attempts to contact the voter, indicating “x” days to respond. If there is no response, the vote becomes 'not persuasive' and the co-chair must notify the ballotter of thi


  Appeals
  Issue How are appeals handled?
  Response · Negative votes could be appealed to the TSC or Board· Affirmative votes cannot be appealed
  Comment

  Some information is not being retained
  Issue · The disposition of the line item as to whether or not a change request has been accepted needs to be retained. · The status of the line item as it pertains to whether or not the responden
  the line item is a separate matter and needs to be recorded in the column titled "withdrawn'

  Some information is not being retained
  Issue By-Laws Section 14.04.01 states: “All comments accompanying affirmative ballots shall be considered by the Technical Committee.”· There is divided opinion as to whether or not Te
  Committee’s need to review all line items in a ballot.· Should there be a statement on the reconciliation document noting what the TC decided?
  Response “. . .considered” does not mean the committee has to take a vote on each line item. However, a record needs to be kept as to the disposition. There are other ways to review, e.g. s
  committee for review offline, and then discuss in conference call. The review could be asynchronous, then coordinated in a conference call. The ballot has to get to a level where the commit
  the item. The committee might utilize a triage process to manage line items.
  Comment Action Item: Add to the ballot spreadsheet a checkoff for “considered; this would not require, but does not prohibit, documentation of the relative discussion.

  Withdrawing Negatives
  To withdraw a negative ballot or vote, HQ must be formally notified. Typically, the ballotter notifies HQ in writing of this intent. If, however, the ballotter has verbally expressed the intentio
  entire negative ballot in the TC meeting, this intent must be documented in the minutes. The meeting minutes can then be sent via e-mail to the negative voter with a note indicating that this
  that he/she withdrew their negative as stated in the attached meeting minutes and that their vote will be considered withdrawn unless they respond otherwise within five (5) days.

  The ballotter may also submit a written statement to the TC. The submitter's withdrawal must be documented and a copy retained by the co-chairs and a copy sent to HL7 HQ by email or fax

  Two weeks (14 days) prior to the scheduled opening of the next ballot, the co-chairs must have shared the reconciliation package or disposition of the negative votes with the negative ballote
  balloters then have 7 days to withdraw their negative vote. If, 7 days prior to the scheduled opening of the next ballot the negative vote is not withdrawn, it will go out
  with the subsequent ballot as an outstanding negative.


  Changes applied are not mapped to a specific response
  Issue Changes are sometimes applied to the standard that are not mapped directly to a specific ballot response , due to editing requirements
  Response: A column to record substantive changes and to track whether the change has been applied was added.



ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Co-Chair Guidelines]                          87                                                                               March 2003
                                                               V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form
  Response: A column to record substantive changes and to track whether the change has been applied was added.

  Asking for negative vote withdrawal:
  Please include the unique ballot ID in all requests to ballot submitters. E.g. if asking a ballot submitter to withdraw a negative please use the ballot ID to reference the ballot.


  The following sections contain known outstanding issues. These have not been resolved because they require a 'ruling' on interpretations of the Bylaws and the Policies and Procedures
  updating of those documents. If you ever in doubt on how to proceed on an item, take a proposal for a method of action, then take a vote on that proposal of action and record it in the s
  the minutes.

  Tracking duplicate ballot issues is a challenge
  Issue Multiple voters submit the same ballot item.
  Response While items may be “combined” for purposes of committee review, each ballot must be responded to independently.
  Comment


  Editorial license
  Issue There is divided opinion as to the boundaries of "editorial license".
  Response
  Comment


  Divided opinion on what requires a vote
  Issue
  Response · Do all negative line items require inspection/vote of the TC? – Yes, but you can group· Do all substantive line items require inspection/vote of the TC? Yes· How should non
  be evaluated for potential controversy that would require inspection and vote of the TC? Prerogative of Chair, if so empowered
  Comment


  Ballet Reconciliation Process Suggestion
  Issue It might be useful to map the proposed change to the ARB Substantive Change document. This would involve encoding the ARB document and making allowances for “Guideline Not
  Response ARB is updating their Substantive Change document; this process might elicit additional changes.
  Comment Action Item? This would require an additional column on the spreadsheet

  How are line item dispositions handled?
  Issue Line items are not handled consistently
  Response · A Withdrawn negative is counted as an affirmative (this is preferable to non-persuasive.)· A Not related remains negative in the ballot pool for quorum purposes, but does not imp
  e.g. it does not count as a negative in the 90% rule.· A Not persuasive remains negative in the ballot pool for quorum purposes, but does not impede the ballot, e.g. it does not count as a nega
  rule.· Every negative needs a response; not every negative needs to be “I agree with your proposed change.” The goal is to get enough negatives resolved in order to get the ballot to pass, w
  quality standard.
  Comment

  How should negative line items in an “Affirmative Ballot” be handled?
  Issue Affirmative Ballots are received that contained negative line items. The current practice is to err on the side of caution and treat the negative line item as a true negative (i.e. negative b

ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Co-Chair Guidelines]                           88                                                                                March 2003
                                                               V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

  How should negative line items in an “Affirmative Ballot” be handled?
  Issue Affirmative Ballots are received that contained negative line items. The current practice is to err on the side of caution and treat the negative line item as a true negative (i.e. negative b
  Response · If a member votes “Affirm with Negative line item” the negative line item is treated as a comment but the ballot overall is affirmative.· Action Item: This must be added to the B
  Comment Revising the ballot spreadsheet to eliminate invalid responses will minimize this issue. Note on the ballot spread

  Difference Between Withdraw and Retract
  If a ballot submitter offers to withdraw the negative line item the ‘negative’ still counts towards the total number of affirmative and negative votes received for the ballot (as it currently seem
  bylaws). If the submitter offers to retract their negative then it does not count towards the overall affirmative and negative votes received for the ballot.




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Co-Chair Guidelines]                           89                                                                                March 2003
                                                             V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Co-Chair Guidelines]               90                    March 2003
                                                                            V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form


e edited, or replaced by use cases)


that ballots returned on unmarked items will be found

 interpretation of “obvious error” as you do not want to

e in adding content. In the early stages of committee
aws require two levels of ballot for new content (refer



ative vote non-persuasive.· In all cases, the voter must

ever, it does not make sense to declare non-persuasive
uasive once you have adopted their recommended




subject to vote.· Out of scope items




use as a management tool. Question will be removed.

affirmative with comment – typonaffirmative with




to Bylaws 15.07.03). The TSC Chair will determine




s each line item must be reviewed. You can use the
ey thing of the affirmative comment and whether or not


               ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Co-Chair Guidelines]               91                    March 2003
                                                                             V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




 chair must notify the ballotter of this disposition.




 ains to whether or not the respondent has withdrawn



 ided opinion as to whether or not Technical

There are other ways to review, e.g. send to the
as to get to a level where the committee could vote on

 ative discussion.


 er has verbally expressed the intention to withdraw the
 voter with a note indicating that this is confirmation
wise within five (5) days.

copy sent to HL7 HQ by email or fax.

gative votes with the negative balloters. The negative
 it will go out




                ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Co-Chair Guidelines]               92                    March 2003
                                                                             V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form



 reference the ballot.


aws and the Policies and Procedures as well as
posal of action and record it in the spreadsheet and in




 f the TC? Yes· How should non-substantive changes




 king allowances for “Guideline Not Found”.




or quorum purposes, but does not impede the ballot,
 allot, e.g. it does not count as a negative in the 90%
 d in order to get the ballot to pass, while producing a




em as a true negative (i.e. negative ballot).

                ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Co-Chair Guidelines]               93                    March 2003
                                                                             V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form


em as a true negative (i.e. negative ballot).
n Item: This must be added to the Ballot Instruction



ed for the ballot (as it currently seems to state in the




                ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Co-Chair Guidelines]               94                    March 2003
                                                             V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Co-Chair Guidelines]               95                    March 2003
Ballot Committee Code   Ballot Committee Name Ballot Code Name

InM                     Infrastructure and      CT
                        Messaging               XML-ITS DataTypes

                                                XML-ITS Structures

                                                Datatypes Abstract
                                                MT
                                                TRANSPORT
                                                UML-ITS DataTypes

                                                CI, AI, QI
                                                MI

CBCC                    Community Based         MR
                        Collaborative Care


CDS                     Clinical Decision Support DS

CS                      Clinical Statement      CS

FM                      Financial Management    AB
                                                CO
                                                CR

II                      Imaging Integration     DI
                                                II

M and M                 Modelling and           RIM
                        Methodology             Refinement
                                                CPP
                                                MIF
                                                HDF

MedRec                  Medical Records (now    MR
                        merged with SD)

OO                      Orders and Observations BB
                                                CG
                                                CP
                                                LB
                                                ME
                                                OB
                                                OR
                                                RX
                                                SP
                                      TD


PA           Patient Administration   PA
                                      MM
                                      SC

PC           Patient Care             PC

PM           Personnel Management     PM

PHER         Public Health /          IZ
             Emergency Response       PH
                                      RR

Publishing   Publishing               V3 Help Guide (ref)
                                      Backbone (ref)

RCRIM        Regulated Clinical Research Information Management
                                      RP
                                      RT

Sched        Scheduling               SC

StructDocs   Structured Documents     CD
                                      QM

Vocab        Vocabulary               Vocabulary (ref)
                                      Glossary (ref)

ArB          Architectural Review Board
Attach       Attachments
CCOW         Clinical Context Object Workgroup
Ed           Education
Meaning

Version 3: (CMET) Common Message Elements, Release 1, 2, 3
Version 3: XML Implementation Technology Specification - Data Types, Release
1
Version 3: XML Implementation Technology Specification - Structures, Release 1

Version 3: Data Types - Abstract Specification, Release 1
Version 3: Shared Messages, Release 1, 2
Version 3: Transport Protocols
Version 3: UML Implementation Technology Specification - Data Types, Release
1
Version 3: Infrastructure Management, Release 1
Version 3: Master File/Registry Infrastructure, Release 1

Version 3: Medical Records: Composite Privacy Consent Directive, Release 1


Version 3: Clinical Decision Support, Release 1

Version 3: Clinical Statement Pattern, Release 1

Version 3: Accounting and Billing, Release 1,2
Version 3: Coverage, Release 1 (virtual CMET domain)
Version 3: Claims and Reimbursement, Release 1, 2, 3, 4

Version 3: Diagnostic Imaging, Release 1
Version 3: Imaging Integration, Release 1

Version 3: Reference Information Model, Release 1, 2
Version 3: Refinement, Extensibility and Conformance, Release 1, 2
Version 3: Core Principles and Properties
Version 3: Model Interchange Format
Version 3: HL7 Development Framework, Release 1

Version 3: Medical Records, Release 1, 2


Version 3: Blood Tissue Organ, Release 1
Version 3: Clinical Genomics, Release 1
Version 3: Common Product Model, Release 1
Version 3: Laboratory, Release 1
Version 3: Medication, Release 1
Version 3: Observations, Release 1
Version 3: Orders, Release 1
Version 3: Pharmacy, Release 1
Version 3: Specimen, Release 1
Version 3: Therapeutic Devices, Release 1


Version 3: Patient Administration, Release 1, 2
Version 3: Material Management, Release 1
Version 3: Scheduling, Release 1

Version 3: Care Provision, Release 1

Version 3: Personnel Management, Release 1

Version 3: Immunization, Release 1
Version 3: Public Health, Release 1
Version 3: Regulated Reporting, Release 1

Version 3: Guide
Version 3: Backbone

Version 3: Regulated Products, Release 1
Version 3: Regulated Studies, Release 1

Version 3: Scheduling, Release 1, 2

Version 3: Clinical Document Architecture, Release 1, 2
Version 3: Quality Measures, Release 1

Version 3: Vocabulary
Version 3: Glossary
Type of Document

Domain

Foundation

Foundation
Foundation
Domain
Foundations

Foundation
Domains
Domain



Domain

Domain

Domain

Domain
Domain
Domain

Domain
Domain

Foundation
Foundation
Foundation
Foundation
Foundation



Domain

Domain
Domain
Domain
Domain
Domain
Domain
Domain
Domain
Domain
Domain



Domain
Domain
Domain

Domain

Domain

Domain
Domain
Domain

Reference
Reference

Domain
Domain

Domain

Domain
Domain

Foundation
Reference
                                                            V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

This page reserved for HL7 HQ. DO NOT EDIT.




                       Affirmative Negative



If you submit an overall affirmative vote, please make sure you have not included negative line items on the Ballot worksheet
Please be sure that your overall negative vote has supporting negative comments with explanations on the Ballot worksheet
You have indicated that you will be attending the Working Group Meeting and that you would like to discuss at least one of your comments with the responsible Committee during that time. Ple




Yes                    No


                                                                              Consi Consi            Pendi Pendi
                                                                              dered - dered -        ng      ng
                                                                     Consider No      Questi         input input
                                                                     ed for   action on              from from
                       Persuasive Not      Not persuasive    Not     future   requir Answe           submit other
Persuasive             with mod persuasive with mod          related use      ed      red            ter     WG
                                                                                              Referred and tracked

HD
AR
RM
IN
TE
MT
DM
ST
??




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Setup]                                    102                                                                           March 2003
                                                    V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form

                                                         ArB,Atta
                                                         ch,Cardi
                                                         o,CBCC,
                                                         CCOW,
                                                         CDS,CG
                                                         ,CIC,Clin
                                                         ical
                                                         Stateme
                                                         nt,Confo
                                                         rm,Ed,E
                                                         HR,FM,II
                                                         ,Implem
                                                         entation,
                                                         InM,ITS,
                                                         Lab,M
                                                         and M,M
                                                         and M/
                                                         CMETs,
                                                         M and
                                                         M/
                                                         Templat
                                                         es,M
                                                         and M/
                                                         Tooling,
                                                         MedRec,
                                                         OO,PA,
                                                         PC,PHE
                                                         R,PM,P
                                                         S,PSC,P
                                                         ublishing
                                                         ,RCRIM,
                                                         RX,Sche
                                                         d,Securit




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Setup]                    103                   March 2003
                                                                           V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




Committee during that time. Please note that due to time constraints not all comments can be reviewed at WGMs and that it is your responsibility to find out when this ballot comment can be scheduled for di




             ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Setup]                                      104                                                                            March 2003
                                                    V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Setup]                   105                    March 2003
                                                                  V3 Ballot Submission/Resolution Form




comment can be scheduled for discussion.




              ced820a4-895d-4b7a-8f9e-898252776fb2.xlsx [Setup]                   106                    March 2003

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:4
posted:9/6/2012
language:Latin
pages:106