W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > November 2007

[COI] Project Plan Feedback

From: Dan Corwin <dan@lexikos.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 23:07:36 -0500
Message-ID: <474B9808.4010803@lexikos.com>
To: "Kashyap, Vipul" <VKASHYAP1@PARTNERS.ORG>
CC: public-hcls-dse@w3.org, public-semweb-lifesci hcls <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>, Stanley Huff <Stan.Huff@intermountainmail.org>, Yan Heras <Yan.Heras@intermountainmail.org>, "Oniki, Tom (GE Healthcare, consultant)" <Tom.Oniki@ge.com>, Joey Coyle <joey@xcoyle.com>, Landen Bain <lbain@topsailtech.com>, "Bron W. Kisler" <bkisler@earthlink.net>, "Rucker, Donald (MED US)" <donald.rucker@siemens.com>, "Bulusu, Vijay" <Vijay.Bulusu@pfizer.com>, charles.hand@bms.com, Pathak.Jyotishman@mayo.edu, "Allen, George O" <geoallen@iupui.edu>, Robin.A.McEntire@gsk.com, john.madden@duke.edu, marcus.collins@novartis.com, akamauu@remedymd.com, tnbhat@nist.gov, cparker@remedymd.com, Chintan Patel <chintan.patel@dbmi.columbia.edu>, "Valenzuela, Miguel" <miguel.valenzuela@roche.com>, fostel@niehs.nih.gov

Kashyap, Vipul wrote:
> Vipul to give update on initial draft of Goals and Tasks
>  
> [VK] Please check out: 
>  http://esw.w3.org/topic/HCLS/ClinicalObservationsInteroperability/ProjectPlan.html
>  
> Feedback, suggestions welcome.
>  
> ---Vipul

Vipul -

Your project plan handles "patient recruitment" only if you assume
that patient records are in DCM and protocol requests come in STDM.
Neither assumption is valid, so its design seems very incomplete.

Any useful architecture will map free-text requirements from *real*
protocol documents into working queries of *real* EMR systems.  DCM
and SDTM may help as intermediate "domain" schema, but without the
real-life endpoints, we'll show only trivial "interoperability".

To meet its stated goals, your project plan must demo (1) turning
real protocol text into queries within some "domain" language; and
(2) such "domain" queries actually working on real-life EMR data.

I've posted "COI architecture" models addressing both goals.  Your
tasks can be aligned with the work suggested, but they get fuzzy
on many details.  I request seeing group email traffic focused on
optimizing designs before going any further on enumerating tasks.

In 6-9 months, given clear designs, any small part-time group can
easily create all we need to properly demo our full use case, and
*also* illustrate general-purpose COI models.  It would be a shame
to blow that opportunity by defining group work tasks prematurely.

regards,
Dan Corwin
Received on Tuesday, 27 November 2007 04:06:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:00:50 GMT