[Openid-specs-heart] Dissecting the Release of information form

[Debbie Bucci]

Well... when thinking about the virtual clipboard vs real world .. I am
usually presented with at least 3 or 4 documents ... the laundry list info
insurance meds allergies etc. Consent for treatment, Privacy Notice and if
referred with no info in hand the release of information.

Seems to me that rpt is essentially an authorization for release.

Adrian asked that we consider roi as part of the discussion....I think he
may be right.

Eves doc was broad and I thought the next step was to drill down to
soecifics.  If we have agreed a virtual clipboard resource set makes sense
that needs to be added.

Specifically from the ROI - John Moerke mentioned date range of treatment -
that's one and this form opts in  sensitive info.... so I think ... the CFR
42 part 2 stuff ( +genomics) may need a specific scope for authorization to
release.

Auditing needs to peripherally be considered as well imo
On Jul 19, 2016 6:56 AM, "Sarah Squire" <sarah at engageidentity.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> This is the use case that Eve has been hashing out on the call for a few
> weeks now:
> https://bitbucket.org/openid/heart/wiki/Alice_Shares_with_Physicians_and_Others_UMA_FHIR
>
> Is there anything specifically added by the NYP form that has not already
> been covered?
>
> Sarah
>
> Sarah Squire
> Engage Identity
> http://engageidentity.com
>
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 5:43 AM, Adrian Gropper <agropper at healthurl.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Debbie,
>>
>> In case it's not on the HEART servers, I've put a copy of the NYP
>> Authorization Form here:
>> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8909568/NYP%20authorization.pdf
>>
>> Mapping the NYP Authorization Form to actual UMA protocol is way above my
>> pay grade. Here's as far as I get (inline):
>>
>> In the case of Alice authorizing  Dr. Bob:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>    - Alice is the Resource Owner *[Yes. Notice that we have to handle
>>>    the case where Alice has a Representative sign for her as at the bottom of
>>>    the form]*
>>>
>>>
>>>    - The requested resource set  - is the protected resource. *[Someone
>>>    else needs to propose the mapping to standards]*
>>>    - The resource set would need to have date range.
>>>       - Form indicates that release of sensitive information is
>>>       explicitly OPT-IN so a confidentiality code of V (very sensitive) would not
>>>       release HIV-AIDS/Mental Health/Genetics/Substance Abuse unless explicitly
>>>       asked for (as a scope?).
>>>    - Can the Authorization server sign the RPT(ROI) on behalf of Alice?*
>>>    [Yes. That's the whole point of UMA and HEART as far as I can tell.]*
>>>    - Probably good hygiene to recommend that claims re: Bob's medical
>>>    affiliation be recorded as part of the audit or consent receipt if unable
>>>    to include as part of RPT process. *[Maybe but it seems peripheral.]*
>>>
>>> It's important to note that this form is labeled by NYP as an
>> "authorization" and represents UMA Phase 2 where Dr. Bob is on the scene.
>> Whoever proposes a mapping to standards needs to also deal with UMA Phase 1
>> where Alice or her representative tells NYP the address of her UMA
>> Authorization Server. This happens before Bob is on the scene and is what I
>> would call "consent".
>>
>> For the purpose of HEART, could we call UMA Phase 1 consent and UMA Phase
>> 2 authorization?
>>
>> Adrian
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20160719/8edd3345/attachment.html>