NwHIN Power Team Specification Evaluation Criteria and Classification Process

1. NwHIN Power TeamSpecification Evaluation Criteria and Classification Process July 26, 2012

2. Agenda • Presentation of RESTful Exchange (RHEx) • Discuss HITSC criteria feedback • Continuity • Optionality • SDOs • Competing Standards • Begin evaluation exercise: HL7 Context-Aware Knowledge Retrieval (“Infobutton”) • Next Steps Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology

3. Criteria, Attributes, Metrics 1) Identify Attributes 2) Define Metrics Evaluation Criteria Maturity of Specification Attribute 1 Attribute 2 ... Attribute n Attribute 1 Attribute 2 ... Attribute n Attribute 1 Attribute 2 ... Attribute n Attribute 1 Attribute 2 ... Attribute n Attribute 1 Attribute 2 ... Attribute n Attribute 1 Attribute 2 ... Attribute n Maturity of Underlying Technology Components Market Adoption Intellectual Property Ease of Implementation/ Deployment Ease of Operations Evaluation Processes Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology

4. Context: Evaluation of Readiness of Technical Specifications to Become National Standards National Standards • Maturity Criteria: • Maturity of Specification • Maturity of Underlying Technology Components • Market Adoption Low Moderate High Maturity Pilots • Adoptability Criteria: • Ease of Implementation and Deployment • Ease of Operations • Intellectual Property Emerging Standards Low Moderate High Adoptability Criteria are Structured, Disciplined, and Objective Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology

5. HITSC Feedback - Continuity • Continuity with prior versions is very important . For example CCDA is not new – lots of reorganizing of materials, therefore more comfortable about CCDA spec than about a whole new approach  Need to capture continuity with prior versions. • Tension with Separation of Concerns Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology

6. HITSC Feedback - Optionality • Not all optionality is equal • It is often undesirable • Good optionality is where there is a business decision to support multiple processes on input • Salutary example: HTTP ETag • Negative example: HL7 V2 content spec • HITSC had no specific edits, but is improvement possible? Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology

7. HITSC Feedback – SDOs • Author of standard considered, but not source • ISO and ANSI can provide validity Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology

8. HITSC Feedback – Competing Standards • Classification criteria assume a single standard under evaluation • How should potential alternatives enter into the criteria? • Availability of Alternatives was considered in 2011 • How should evaluation proceed when alternatives are explicitly identified? Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology

9. HL7 Infobutton Evaluation • Rating for each criteria are (H)igh, (M)edium, or (L)ow • Notes / Justification Column captures reviewers thoughts • Overall Rating is also High, Medium, Low but is not necessarily an average of individual criteria ratings. • Benefits: • More fine grained analysis • Structured, disciplined, objective approach • Challenges: • Reliance on ratings • Dependent on evaluator analysis • More qualitative than quantitative Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology

10. Next Steps • PT members independently review Infobutton specification, and complete individual scoring worksheets • Final Power Team Meeting – August 9, 2012 2-4 PM ET • Discuss individual evaluations of Infobutton specification – complete consensus evaluation • Incorporate any changes suggested by evaluation exercise into classification criteria • Agree upon final recommendations to HITSC • August 15, 2012 – Present final findings and recommendations to HITSC Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology

11. Glossary Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology

12. Appendix Appendix Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology

13. Maturity Criteria and Attributes

14. Adoptability Criteria and Attributes

15. Metrics for Maturity of Specification (1/2) Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology

16. Metrics for Maturity of Specification(2/2) Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology

17. Metrics for Maturity of UnderlyingTechnology (1/3) Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology

18. Metrics for Maturity of UnderlyingTechnology (2/3) Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology

19. Metrics for Maturity of UnderlyingTechnology (3/3) Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology

20. Attributes of Market Adoption Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology

21. Metrics for Ease of Implementation/Deployment (1/3) Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology

22. Metrics for Ease of Implementation/Deployment(2/3) Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology

23. Metrics for Ease of Implementation/Deployment (3/3) Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology

24. Metrics for Ease of Operations Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology

25. Attributes of Intellectual Property Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology