Attendees:

Debbie Bucci

KIM Glen Marshall

Jin Wen

Adrian Gropper

Justin Richer

William Kinsley

Edmund Jay

Danny van Leeuwen

Dale Moberg

ONC OCPO

Use Case: Alice Consents to Clinical Research [UMA]

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxZEh73RDPxdMW9EMDRqcV92RGJpb2ZaMjdQTzJlNHNXTmJF/view

Can FHIR respond to a query with a pseudonymised record? We don’t know. It is geared around resources rather than identities, so it should be able to support that capability if it doesn’t already. Glen will ask the HL7 workgroup.

Are resource owner and patient interchangeable? In the UMA case, we do assume that, yes. Even if the data were submitted by a third party, like a lab, it is assumed that all data about a patient is owned by that patient.

Is the scope of HEART limited to FHIR? No. It is limited for the purpose of this use case, but the project in general is not limited to FHIR.

In the previous use case, we had a standard use-of-information form that the patient signs to authorize clinical use. Is the form in this use case essentially the same? Yes, it is. There is an attempt to standardize that form by PCORNet for use across IRBs.

OAuth FHIR Semantic Profile

http://openid.bitbucket.org/HEART/openid-heart-fhir-oauth2.html

The terms "patient" and "user" in the resource type might be misleading. They were taken from Argonaut, so maybe we need to give them guidance around that. We will take this discussion to the list.

A gap we identified in FHIR is that it is difficult to identify a specific root resource. The audience parameter allows us to do that. This may be something we can push back to the FHIR community.

Next week

Next week's meeting will be held on Tuesday rather than Monday. No other use cases are pending. We will move onto the UMA scope document, implementation, and interoperability testing.