See also: IRC log
scribenick bobP
Michel: First thing, acknowledge
that group composition is changing
... over last year was experiment: three areas, two task forces
for each
... but onerous and confusing (a little)
... So...whether to restructure
... Matthias would like to merge Pgx and CDS
... suggesting to go to three task forces: LS, PGx, health
care
<matthias_samwald> Sounds very good, won't impact participation.
ericP: COI has been happening outside of HCLS, it's me and Charlie
<egombocz> I think, it's a good suggestion - it will increase participation in my opinion as it condenses the number of meetings, and there is some logical / thematic overlap
ericP: CDISC work may bring in
more pharmas to to clinical trials discussion for calls
... otherwise, we can have more conversations, spawn calls when
we need them
Scott: +1 to fewer meetings;
there was interest in joining HCLS, simpler to merge, plus
participation will go up
... always open, but not perceived that way: Wiki page should
be Step1, step 2, step 3
... if you call in at wrong time discussion will seem
opaque
ericP: Not sure we get more
participation with fewer meetings
... need action items and public humiliation :D
... items and tracking and meeting due dates
... also, Task force leads do most of the work; we need fresh
blood, motivated to find people who get our problems
Michel: Identifying what the
tasks are; and how to encourage people to take up tasks
... always have talked about getting funding, but w/in our own
research group for our own tasks
... for participant: What do they want to get out of it?
... drive conversation thru level of commitment, or go for more
resources?
... alignment of activity and participant is the issue
ericP: +1 to action items at particular times
Michel: Actionable action items
Rich: Attracted to calls b/c drug
interations, linking w clinical relevance etc
... +1 to restructuring according to use cases
... there is overlap between what HCLS does and my goals
... value is collaborating with people
Michel: HCLS has fostered new collaborations
Rich: It has been useful to have artifacts
Michel: Agree. Major role of
linked life data group, extending our hand to other
communities
... a natural role for w3c and hcls to get up-take in other
communities
<egonw> I found that a lodd group was easier to work for/with, as the tasks were simpler, and very explicit
<egonw> use cases are much harder to solve, and practically converted into actions points
Ratnesh: Specific task leaders, at the end they have a recommendation; who owns the task?
<egonw> the action points tend to take a lot more time
ericP: Reason these are
productive is that the chair rules with an iron fist.
... comes back to Michel's point if ID-ing action items
... paid professional time for WG, but here people work on the
margins of their time
... how much you can expect of somebody
... tasks that are near HCLS could turn into work w/in
HCLS
... Matthias: how is CDS is going?
Matthias: Participants in calls
are short of time
... many of us, problem is lack of time plus lack of clear
goals
... prototype of RDF is reasonable goals 5 years ago; not
reasonable now
<ratnesh> +1 to Matthias, HCLS needs clear cut goals
Matthias: need goals that have
impact. Harder to organize in heterogeneous group w/o
hierarchy
... CDS, I'm working on release of ontology that captures PGx
rules, alleles
<matthias_samwald> http://www.w3.org/wiki/HCLSIG/CDS/Example_of_individual_pharmacogenetic_patient_data_in_OWL
Matthias: (this shows PGx for a
single person?)
... difficult to divide up this task. Prototype will be soon,
then establish this ontology based formalism
ericP: So, awkward time right before clean-up, check.
Michel: Lot of work has been
preliminary; engage point is when you can show something
... lot of stuff we build gets noticed, but after the
fact
... discussion about prototype comes before buy-in
ericP: +Prototypes then show them
off
... OWLim stuff is proceeding mostly on its own
... CDISC, working on what ODM looks like in RDF, must spend
time on getting value out
... term invocation, how to find equivalences in clincially
acquired data
... hoping to get more pharmas in CDISC stuff
... I type a lot :)
Scott: CDISC to clinical, or HL7, FHIR?
ericP; There is blog about how to do this in xml. Working now on how to do this clearly in RDF
scribe: do not need to make a choice between cdisc or other, etc
Scott: Take advantage of several
participants in group. Ratnesh is part of link for safety
... Charlie was enthusiastic: take RDF for eligibility for
trial, use that w patient data
ericP: Sounds like it would be
good for COI front page
... are there partners that can work w us?
... I'm spread thin right now
... but therer are revolutions going in both HL7 and FDA
Ratnesh: I can write about clincial trial stuff
ericP: Another piece: whole bunch of IMIs that do overlapping work
<mscottm> My proposal more precisely was: Take the RDF/OWL encoding of eligibility criteria for clinical trials (formal representation to
<mscottm> come from VUA) and use it to steer info retrieval from a partner's patient data (initially exported as HL7 v2/v3 XML).
ericP: we could help community adopt semweb "tech w least frustration" document the intersection points
<mscottm> The goal is to bridge from RDF to HL7 models with eligibility studies as the 'driving' application.
<ericP> http://www.w3.org/wiki/HCLS/SWAT4LS2012/Hackathon#Data_Map
ericP: there are modeling efforts
before sparql endpoints; we can help people make better use of
their time
... "Hey, let's become librarians"
Michel: Hackathon list of communities is great. Exactly the approach to be a bridge between communities
ericP: If bridges are critical
enough then the value persists
... we can show practical ways to take advantage of our mapping
efforts
... doc that is crucial that engages community to maintain
<ratnesh> http://www.w3.org/wiki/HCLS/ClinicalObservationsInteroperability/HL7_RIM
ericP: We can figure new ways to
describe what we have done
... breakdown by dataspace, by task, different axes for people
to comprehend where new people should enter
... can improve our outreach greatly
Ratnesh: Link gives an overview
of HL7 models
... RIM, everything is UML diagrams. But for ontology, some
things are not obvious
ericP: Lloyd MacKenzie(?) is also
modeling the RIM in OWL
... HL7 RIM, xml is a MIF, MIF to OWL; Lloyd is working on all
this
Ratnesh: (discussion of classes, attributes, identities etc)
(Ratnesh, ericP, Michel go way-way deep :)
ericP: +1 appreciation to Ratnesh who speaks both OWL and UML
<ericP> http://www.w3.org/wiki/HCLS/ClinicalObservationsInteroperability/CDISC
ericP: CDISC, groups Roche and AZ are working on SDTM
<egombocz> Apologies -need to log out for another meeting - excellent meeting today!
ericP: Combining clincial care
data and clincial trial data, no distributed extensibility
model
... will write this down in RDF
<michel> sorry gotta run!
Scott: Patients/trials: we need
not everything about pt, but start by eligibility
criteria
... narrows down from thousands of things to say to tens
... criteria from trial is the place to start, instead of
swimming in data
ericP: Nothing that disambiguates w/in EHR data
<ratnesh> OWLRIM: OWL-UML differences http://www.w3.org/TR/sw-oosd-primer/
Scott: Eligibility criteria is about the Pt, so it's the same core domain as the EHR
ericP: But the same domains are
being captured in different ways
... yes the intersect captures the person and the protocol, but
it is hard to see how to use it
Scott: Encode eligibility requirements...
ericP: Clinical trial criteria,
each application reduces the aggregate
... CROs get precise data about people, sometimes you want to
look at later in 2nd study
... also subfractions of cohorts
... working toward useability once the trial has already
starte
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.137 of Date: 2012/09/20 20:19:01 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: bobP Inferring Scribes: bobP WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found. WARNING: No "Present: ... " found! Possibly Present: Bob_Powers Bosse IPcaller MacTed Matthias Michel OWLRIM P12 P3 Rich Scott aaaa aabb aacc aadd bobP boycer egombez egombocz egonw ericP matthias_samwald mscottm ratnesh rboyce You can indicate people for the Present list like this: <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary <dbooth> Present+ amy Got date from IRC log name: 06 Nov 2012 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2012/11/06-hcls-minutes.html People with action items: WARNING: No "Topic: ..." lines found! Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>. Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of new discussion topics or agenda items, such as: <dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]