WG6 Tcon15 Meeting minutes 11202012

From PHUSE Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

FDA/PhUSE Roadmap Tcon #15,
November 20, 2012

Attendees: Debra, Bob, Gitte, Anisa, Rick

Action Item Wrap-up:
The survey has been advertised on CDISC Newsletter, LinkedIN groups, and among a few WG6 teams. Posting among ACT members is in-process. Prior Minutes (and today's minutes) posted today.

Survey Distribution

- The deadline for the prioritization survey submission will be extended to Dec15th.

A.I. Bob will update the survey file to reflect the new deadline and will forward it to Rick for posting.

- The team did a summary of the recent efforts to distribute the prioritization survey to CDISC, LinkedIn, and the Interorganizational and Historical controls teams in WG6.

- The Roadmap group agreed that we should provide links to other team's work where relevant in the Roadmap e-paper.

-This will serve a dual purpose by eliminating duplication of work and providing resources for people new to standards (one of the group's desired functions for the e-paper)

Wikipedia discussion
-Members of the group noted that the SEND Wikipedia page is outdated. The group agreed that updating the SEND Wikipedia site with links to the PhUSE WG deliverables would be advantageous to getting the word out to data standards newcomers

A.I. Bob will engage Tim on posting WG6 material to the SEND Wikipedia page.

e-Paper
- The group took a look at our proposed sections for the e-Paper. Links to other WG efforts will be included as-needed.
- Introduction - providing our idea of optimized access to data
- As a first focus, it could set the stage for the rest of the work.
- Survey section (for a later date)
- Innovation section - approaches for transmission, submission, and review of data.
- Bob introduced this section as a place to offer innovative ideas to standardization (beyond our prioritization survey and SEND-specific matters).

-Gitte offered that one issue is how to align expectations of the sender and receiver of standardized data. Without mandatory domains or a defined set of basic data for each study, there is a potential for disparate data between studies. Perhaps not an issue specific to our group, it was thought that this could be a provocative thought in the e-paper and fruitful discussion for the WG6 (as a whole).

Bob agreed to bring this to Tim as a matter for WG6 to consider.


Last revision by Dorsamr,11/20/2012