Project Summary for Refactor HL7 Confidentiality Concept Domain, code system & value sets
Visit Project Insight to see the full project details. *
Project Details
Number | 798 View Ballot Items List (with NIBs) |
---|---|
Name | Refactor HL7 Confidentiality Concept Domain, code system & value sets |
Sponsor(s) | Community-Based Care and Privacy (CBCP) Work Group |
Co-Sponsor(s) | Security Work Group |
Steering Division | Clinical |
Description | 1. Current State analysis The project will provide a thorough analysis of the current confidentiality concept domains, coding system, and value sets. As part of the analysis, we intend to make clear a distinction in the confidentiality concept domain, coding system, and value sets about how this vocabulary is to be used with patient-centric information. 2. Identify changes that will be proposed The project will identify the changes to be proposed that may include revised, deprecated, and/or additional vocabulary to support and expand the current Confidentiality codes. Further evaluation may also introduce additional concept domains, coding systems, and value sets. 3. Identify impacts of proposed changes on current implementations. (One method may be to survey the HL7 International Council and using a survey tool involved in concert with the Vocabulary WG, Steering Divisions and TSC) 4. Communicate proposed changes to the community, discuss and document feedback Based on the feedback, this project may produce a Vocabulary Harmonization Proposal for the November meeting. |
Project Facilitator | Serafina Versaggi; Kathleen Connor |
Status | Archived |
SD Approval Date | Sep 12, 2011 |
TSC Approval Date | Sep 28, 2011 |
Type | Ballot - Comment |
Objectives / Deliverables | Draft Use Cases available for HL7 WGs Peer Review - Target: Aug 2011 Review of Draft Use Cases to support code sets - Target: September 2011 Harmonization Proposals - Target: November 2011 Possible Draft for Comment - Target: January 2012 Project End Date - Target: September 2012 |
Next Milestone Date | 2014 January WGM |
Project End Date | 2014 January WGM |
Project Intent | Revise Current Standard, Supplement to a Current Standard, Implementation Guide |
Project Need | Changes to the current vocabulary are required. This project will use a specific area of concern (Confidentiality) as a way to identify an approach that can be used to address other areas of HL7 vocabulary concern. The current HL7 Confidentiality concept domain, code system, and value sets are overloading the coded attributes of confidentiality. As a result, implementers are able to change the meaning of these attributes via the vocabulary bindings. The concept domain, code system, and value sets needs to be clear, cohesive and supported by use cases. A key impetus for this project is that Government regulations internationally allow patients to specify finer constraints on the sharing of their medical records. Examples include: 1. Certain value sets in the Confidentiality code system have ambiguous usage notes: ' By information type, only for service catalog entries (multiples allowed). Not to be used with actual patient data!' This means that the ConfidentialityByInfoType is currently only appropriate if attached to anonymized data and is not appropriate for use with patient identifiable information. However, in HL7 version 2, these codes are assigned to Master File Service Catalog items, and then used on patient specific messages about those Service Catalog items. Terminology is needed that is usable with patient identifiable information and also is consistent with closely related HL7 works, so that system implementations can interoperate while robustly preserving privacy. 2. Current terminology conflates multiple purposes, resulting in implementer confusion. (E.g. ConfidentialityByAccessKind: “conflates role-based and user-based access control code values (clinician and individual) with Confidentiality Codes such as normal and restricted.”) 3. Currently the Act.confidentialityCode and Role.confidentialtyCode usage notes suggest that these attributes are synonymous with ‘sensitivity.’ These two concepts are not equivalent. a. Confidentiality is the property that information is not made available or disclosed to unauthorized individuals, entities, or processes [ISO 7498-2:1989] b. Sensitivity is the characteristic of a resource which implies its value or importance and may include its vulnerability [ISO7498-2:1989. Note: Vulnerability here is defined as medically vulnerable; subject to social stigmatization. Additional concept domains, code sets, and value sets may be needed as a result of this project. |
Implementers | 1) Department of Veteran Affairs (DVA) 2) SAMHSA |
Security Risks | |
External Drivers | |
Common Names / Keywords/ Aliases | |
Lineage | |
Dependancies | 529 - Security Domain Analysis Model 646 - Security and Privacy Ontology 224 - Privacy and Authorization Terminology (Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) Composite Privacy Consent Directive Model DSTU R2 (approved spec) As for what project has a dependancy on this project, Structured Doc's CDA R3 project #477 is dependant upon this project. |
Project Document Repository |
HL7 GForge [http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/project/cbcc/docman/] HL7 CBCC Working Group WiKi [http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=Community-Based_Collaborative_Care] |
Backwards Compatibility | Don't Know |
External Vocabularies | |
Products | V3 Foundation-Vocab Domains & Value Sets |
Joint Copyright? | |
External Pjt Collaborators | Possible collaboration includes: SNOMED/IHTSDO, ISO |
Realm | Universal |
HL7 Affiliate | |
Stakeholders | Clinical and Public Health Laboratories, Immunization Registries, Quality Reporting Agencies, Regulatory Agency, Standards Development Organizations (SDOs), Payors |
Vendors | Pharmaceutical; EHR, PHR; Equipment; Health Care IT; Clinical Decision Support Systems; Lab; HIS |
Providers | Clinical and Public Health Laboratories; Emergency Services; Local and State Departments of Health; Medical Imaging Service; Healthcare Institutions (hospitals, long term care, home care, mental health); Other (specify in Misc. Notes below) |
Ballot Cycle Info | 2013 Sept Ballot Cycle Info: NORMATIVE Ballot results: Did not meet basic vote requirements. Document Name: HL7 Healthcare Privacy and Security Classification System, Release 1 NIB Submitted By: Mike Davis 2013 May Ballot Cycle Info: DSTU Ballot results: Met basic vote requirements. 15 Negatives to reconcile Document Name: HL7 Healthcare Privacy and Security Classification System, Release 1 NIB Submitted By: Mike Davis 2013 Jan Ballot Cycle Info: COMMENT ONLY Ballot results: Met basic vote requirements. 21 Negatives to reconcile Document Name: HL7 Healthcare Privacy and Security Classification System, Release 1 Ballot Code: PRIV_SEC_CLASS_SYS_R1_O2_2013JAN 2012 Sept Ballot Cycle Info: COMMENT ONLY Ballot results: Met basic vote requirements. 27 Negatives to reconcile Document Name: HL7 Healthcare Privacy and Security Classification System, Release 1 Ballot Code: PRIV_SEC_CLASS_SYS_R1_O1_2012SEP NIB Submitted By: John Moehrke |
Misc Notes | Aug 2014: Received ANSI approval for HL7 Healthcare Privacy and Security Classification System, Release 1. PMO archiving project. Jan 2013 H. Grain: completed at last harmonisation meeting. Given this, the PMO removed Vocab as a co-sponsor so this project wouldn't appear on Vocab's list of projects. Oct 2011: SVersaggi: The Security DAM which passed DSTU back in May 2010 (#529) just never got published. Kathleen has been working with the Security WG to move that process forward. At the same time, the project to harmonize/re-factor the Confidentiality Code Concept Domain is a separate project that is going through this next harmonization cycle. As a result of that work, changes were made to the Security DAM. We would like to re-ballot the DAM as an update to the DSTU as the result. Other Providers: National and International Government Agencies (Australia, Germany, Japan, Spain, Canada, New Zealand, US, Netherlands), Research organizations Other SDO/Profilers: IHTSDO |
U.S. Govt Interest? | |
USRSC Approval | |
FMG Approval | |
ARB Approval | |
Start Date | Aug 12, 2011 |
* A Project Insight User ID and password is required to access Project Insight. Contact the HL7 PMO at for more information.
Visit the Projects, Ballots and Standards Metrics Excel Report to view projects that are behind 120+ days along with other ballots and standards requiring a Work Group's attention.
Visit the Projects, Ballots and Standards Metrics Excel Report to view projects that are behind 120+ days along with other ballots and standards requiring a Work Group's attention.