Everything always talks longer than you want. The above diagram went into the minutes of our May IHE face to face meeting, courtesy of XDCD. I'm spending a good bit of time on this project, in the expectation that we will be able to shave huge chunks of time from developing IHE profiles. That makes it worthwhile.
My target for the next week is to simply be able to perform a comparison of section requirements between the CDA Consolidation guide and the IHE PCC Technical Framework. Fortunately, IHE and CCDA both chunk at a fairly high level, generating requirements about code, title, and a few other section attributes, and spend most of their time on subsection or entry requirements.
So after cleaning up the crosswalk (I found some missing templates in the appendix mapping CCDA templates to HITSP/IHE/HL7/CCD templates), I'm about ready to generate the requirements from the IHE and CCDA content. This should go fairly quickly, because there are only about 28 templates that we need to do this for.
What I find most interesting is that the Consolidated CDA has 7 templates which it provides both "coded" and "uncoded" forms, and IHE PCC has 3, and they don't overlap. It doesn't stop me from performing the comparison, but does mean that I'll have to perform ten comparisons twice, once against the "uncoded" form, and a second time against the coded form. In performing these comparisons, I feel as if I'm trying to solve the graph isomorphism problem. In one way, I am, but in another way I'm not. We already have an evaluation of the isomorphism in the mappings between templates. What I'm really trying to generate is how different these two graphs are.
In any case, I'm making progress, and given how much time I expect it to save, I still have several months of effort I can focus on this problem for it to be worthwhile. At least according to Randall in his chart above.
0 comments:
Post a Comment