Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Incorporate into Open Referral Specification? #14

Open
mheadd opened this issue Nov 9, 2014 · 8 comments
Open

Incorporate into Open Referral Specification? #14

mheadd opened this issue Nov 9, 2014 · 8 comments

Comments

@mheadd
Copy link
Contributor

mheadd commented Nov 9, 2014

Might be possible to fold the spec for flu shot locations into the developing Open Referral specification. See this thread.

@greggish
Copy link

greggish commented Dec 2, 2014

We've released version 0.8 of the Open Referral format -- see the specification documentation here.

This begins the 2-week 'Request for Comment' period before a version 1.0 release in early January (after which point we'll set it and walk away for a year to see how development goes :). If we want to test out whether the flu shot spec can align with the Open Referral spec, this would be a good time to do it.

@mheadd
Copy link
Contributor Author

mheadd commented Dec 2, 2014

Working on a gap analysis now.

@mheadd
Copy link
Contributor Author

mheadd commented Dec 12, 2014

@greggish I did a quick comparison of what is in the current flu shot spec and the latest version of the Open Referral spec. You can see the results here (note the last two columns).

I'd say generally this looks pretty good. The only substantive issue that I can see is that the proposed OR specification doesn't seem to (unless I'm missing it) provide a way to represent a service at a location for a fixed period of time - like one week, one day or even a set time period on one day.

Locations where flu shots are dispensed (and other kinds of inoculations I would think) may be city run facilities or they may be a federally qualified health center (FQHC). City run facilities may provide shots for the duration of flu season, but FQHC's may only do it on specific dates, or even on one day during flu season.

This distinction is one of the reasons that the flu shot spec actually designates what kind of facility is dispensing shots (using a facility_type field).

Is there a way within the current OR spec to designate that a service at a specific facility is only available on specific days (or at specific times on a day)?

@greggish
Copy link

Good questions. We should ask them in the spec. (See here.) Might want to ask the Open Referral community group about it to see how orgs currently deal with this. (Also cc'ing @spara.)

That said, I'm not sure if I see how a facility_type field is necessary... if the facility type may or may not correspond with the schedule of service, then is it useful? (It seems like schedule would still be the operative information.) Does facility_type have some other value too?

@mheadd
Copy link
Contributor Author

mheadd commented Dec 14, 2014

There is the potential value to be able to calculate the number of inoculations given by facility type. I don;t know if any analysis is being done on this front, but I can see some potential value there.

@greggish
Copy link

re: fixed time periods, see @spara's response here.

re: facility_type, we can ask that in the spec doc as well, but I suspect that it's going to be considered a taxonomy issue -- meaning, a tag to indicate the type of service. And/or: we anticipate that 'subdomain profiles' or 'filters' will emerge from the community, in which developers adapt the spec with more granular information for particular subdomains, and perhaps this could be an instance.

What do you think? Next steps?

@mheadd
Copy link
Contributor Author

mheadd commented Dec 15, 2014

I added a comment on the doc. Depending on the response, it should be possible to try and reformat a flu shot data set in the OR format once its finalized.

@greggish
Copy link

Okay. to add on to @spara's comment about how users can extend the spec:

we have some 'subdomain profiles' emerging, like for legal services and emergency services. In those instances, users are adding on fields and/or establishing conditions as they see fit for particular kinds of services. (I expect that some of those adaptations will be submitted into future iterations of the spec, if demonstrated to be generally applicable.)

lmk what you think...

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants