[Openid-specs-heart] Draft HEART Meeting Notes 2015-08-24

[Eve Maler]

Completing my self-imposed action item, I "ported" the OAuth entity
definitions subsection from the Alice Registers with PCP and Sets Up
Two-Way Exchange...
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IvbdWerdvMuA1dQ-KQvVKqIBrAas7FoenNVUtgpqYrw/edit?usp=sharing>
use case into the Elderly Mom with Family Caregiver
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1V3e_fDH63fNDsV-WOGKcyg0ebuW165DOpjY_RcuMk4U/edit?usp=sharing>
use case, and added an UMA entity definitions subsection. Please see the
latter for a couple of inserted comments where I explain a few things I did
along the way.

(I sure wish there were a way to transclude
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transclusion> external content into each
GDoc, so that we could keep the entity definitions up to date while
inserting them automatically into each use case. Oh well.)


*Eve Maler*ForgeRock Office of the CTO | VP Innovation & Emerging Technology
Cell +1 425.345.6756 | Skype: xmlgrrl | Twitter: @xmlgrrl
Join our ForgeRock.org OpenUMA <http://forgerock.org/openuma/> community!

On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 2:41 PM, Sarah Squire <sarah at engageidentity.com>
wrote:

> Attendees:
>
> Debbie Bucci
>
> Thompson Boyd
>
> Sarah Squire
>
> Adrian Gropper
>
> Catherine Schulten
>
> Abbie Barbir
>
> Justin Richer
>
> Danny van Leeuwen
>
> Andrew Hughes
>
> Eve Maler
>
> Jeffrey Shultz
>
> Josh Mandel
>
> William Kinsley
>
> Glen Marshall
>
> Chad Evans
>
> Edmund Jay
>
> Michael Magrath
>
> Dale Moberg
>
> Ishmal Bartley
>
> Jin Wen
>
> Jim Kragh
>
> Salvatore D’Agostino
>
> Discussion:
>
> Semantic Profiles
>
> Are we waiting on use cases before creating a semantic profile?
>
> We will create the profile based on SMART on FHIR. We should inject scopes
> and other pieces of semantic information as we come across a need for them
> in the use cases.
>
> Alice Enrolls with PCP (
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IvbdWerdvMuA1dQ-KQvVKqIBrAas7FoenNVUtgpqYrw/edit
> )
>
> We discussed the problem statement for the use case “Alice Enrolls with
> PCP and Sets Up Two-Way Exchange of Personal Data Between EHR and PHR
> [OAuth Only].” We removed a bullet point regarding use of a trust framework
> and moved it to the “Setup” section, since it is an assumption, not a
> problem that is addressed by this use case. We removed a bullet point
> regarding messaging from the PCP to Alice’s PHR because that functionality
> is encompassed in the first bullet point.
>
> Adrian’s Use Cases
>
>
>    -
>
>    Elderly Mom with Family Caregiver
>    <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1V3e_fDH63fNDsV-WOGKcyg0ebuW165DOpjY_RcuMk4U/edit>
>    -
>
>       A heartwarming true story of love and devotion. It's all about
>       Alice!
>       -
>
>    ROI Perspective on health information sharing
>    <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1biUqGwvOinf9Sj6eyh3hiiDzoccSEaz3ewOTa7WcwoY/edit#>
>    -
>
>       A true story based on paving the current cow path. It's all about
>       the institution.
>       -
>
>    Only 4 Ways to Share Data
>    <https://docs.google.com/document/d/17-C7nyI-ZiL4_LsFNrXXrM2MSPx4sCqXSEui2pwhVe8/edit#heading=h.mxi7vvxgyv>
>    -
>
>       From Alice's perspective. Not a full use-case but a useful way to
>       understand why UMA
>
>
> HIMSS Identity Task Force
>
> Patients and their proxies are being worked on by the HIMSS identity task
> force. Is the HEART project interested in learning more about this work?
> Yes, Catherine will send more information to Adrian.
>
> Elderly mom use case
>
> Should we have more than one “payer”? Typically there are multiple payers,
> but multiple payers are irrelevant to the problem being solved, so it’s
> simpler to include only one.
>
> Should we have more than one “custodian”? Usually the caregiver and the
> proxy are not the same person. However, that is also irrelevant to the
> problem being solved, so it’s simpler to include only one.
>
> Are these the appropriate technical preconditions given that most
> healthcare systems are very complex? These are the most appropriate for
> this use case specifically.
>
> Should required signatures be routed to a proxy, and if so, should this
> use case address that? We don’t want to introduce any HIPAA violations into
> the system. Things are usually only routed to the proxy when the patient is
> incompetent or unable to sign, so it becomes a murky legal area.
>
> Sarah Squire
> Engage Identity
> http://engageidentity.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openid-specs-heart mailing list
> Openid-specs-heart at lists.openid.net
> http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-specs-heart
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-heart/attachments/20150830/78c3dacf/attachment.html>