1、 ISO 2012 Knowledge management of health information standards Gestion des connaissances des normes en information de la sant TECHNICAL REPORT ISO/TR 13054 First edition 2012-08-01 Reference number ISO/TR 13054:2012(E) ISO/TR 13054:2012(E) ii ISO 2012 All rights reserved COPYRIGHT PROTECTED DOCUMENT
2、 ISO 2012 All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, no part of this publication may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and microfilm, without permission in writing from either ISO at the address below or ISOs member body in
3、the country of the requester. ISO copyright office Case postale 56 CH-1211 Geneva 20 Tel. + 41 22 749 01 11 Fax + 41 22 749 09 47 E-mail copyrightiso.org Web www.iso.org Published in Switzerland ISO/TR 13054:2012(E) ISO 2012 All rights reserved iii Contents Page Foreword iv Introduction v 1 Scope 1
4、2 T erms and definitions . 1 3 Symbols and abbreviated terms . 2 4 Overview 2 4.1 General . 2 4.2 Issues of knowledge management . 2 4.3 Knowledge structure 3 4.4 Sharing knowledge between standards developers and standards users . 4 5 Health informatics standards classification 4 5.1 General . 4 5.
5、2 Classification considerations 4 5.3 Classification review 5 6 Improving knowledge exchange between developers and users 9 6.1 General . 9 6.2 Organized information for users in published standards 9 6.3 Standardized contributions to knowledge resource tools .10 6.4 User feedback .10 7 Knowledge ma
6、nagement tools 10 7.1 General .10 7.2 Tools for visual exploration 11 Annex A (informative) Description of HIS-KR/Spider/SKMT toolset .12 Bibliography .13 ISO/TR 13054:2012(E) Foreword ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a worldwide federation of national standards bodies (IS
7、O member bodies). The work of preparing International Standards is normally carried out through ISO technical committees. Each member body interested in a subject for which a technical committee has been established has the right to be represented on that committee. International organizations, gove
8、rnmental and non-governmental, in liaison with ISO, also take part in the work. ISO collaborates closely with the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) on all matters of electrotechnical standardization. International Standards are drafted in accordance with the rules given in the ISO/IEC
9、Directives, Part 2. The main task of technical committees is to prepare International Standards. Draft International Standards adopted by the technical committees are circulated to the member bodies for voting. Publication as an International Standard requires approval by at least 75 % of the member
10、 bodies casting a vote. In exceptional circumstances, when a technical committee has collected data of a different kind from that which is normally published as an International Standard (“state of the art”, for example), it may decide by a simple majority vote of its participating members to publis
11、h a Technical Report. A Technical Report is entirely informative in nature and does not have to be reviewed until the data it provides are considered to be no longer valid or useful. Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this Technical Report may be the subject of patent
12、 rights. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights. ISO/TR 13054 was prepared by Technical Committee ISO/TC 215, Health informatics. iv ISO 2012 All rights reserved ISO/TR 13054:2012(E) Introduction Health informatics standards are in progressive production by d
13、ifferent standards development organizations. They respond to current challenges in health information system implementation. These standards are intended to promote more effective systems in coherent evolution and provide benefits in many different contexts, for developed and developing countries.
14、Of importance therefore is that these standards can be accessible and understandable by many different health information system protagonists and implementers. With the increasing number of health informatics standards and health information system implementations, there is an imperative need to sup
15、port different categories of person who need to know about these standards. These persons include developers, implementers, planners, and health information system users, health informatics standards developers and standards developers in domains other than health. It is expected that the increasing
16、 availability of knowledge will: improve awareness between standards developers, including different contextual needs, ensure more rapid understanding and uptake by system developers, ensure better, more supportive understanding of the role and importance of standards by information system implement
17、ers and general users of health information systems. The word informatics rather than information is chosen a) with reference to the title of ISO/TC 215, b) in recognition of the broad meaning now assumed by informatics rejoining technological and information management issues, However this word is
18、less familiar to some sector communities working in areas where standards of information processing and management are relevant to a successful health system; an example might be SDMX for health indicator reporting. Such standards are deemed within the purview of this Technical Report. This Technica
19、l Report contributes to the emerging use of electronic communications in the development and evaluation of standards. It is noteworthy in addressing communication between standards developers and users. This Technical Report was developed in meaningful conjunction with ISO/TR 14639, Health informati
20、cs Capacity-based eHealth architecture roadmap, with a view that this usefully provides an integrated context for understanding the role of different health information standards, as well as a test for the relevance of individual standards for countries developing health information systems and thei
21、r policies. Also considered is the potential to provide feedback to standards developers. NOTE The World Health Organization-sponsored The Registry of Open Access Data Standards (ROADS) initiative also provides input for considerations of availability of health information standards to developing co
22、untries. ISO 2012 All rights reserved v Knowledge management of health information standards 1 Scope This Technical Report describes a standards knowledge management (SKM) methodology and metadata to support the easy identification of the existence of a health informatics standard, its developmental
23、 status, and its associated Standards Development Organization (SDO). In particular, it describes a knowledge-based navigation methodology to enable rapid appreciation of the contextual roles and purposes of a standard, including the relationship between one standard and others, particularly in the
24、same standards domain. This Technical Report also gives information about the design of tools to support knowledge management of health informatics standards. This Technical Report is intended for use by: a) health informatics standards developers and standards development organizations; b) develope
25、rs, implementers and managers of health information systems, clinical information systems and clinical decision support systems; c) all users of health information systems clinical data, such as health statisticians, researchers, public health agencies, health insurance providers, health risk organi
26、zations, data analysts and data managers. Possible cases where it might be used include: 1) supporting the discovery and contextual understanding of relevant standards by system implementers and policy makers; 2) supporting the discovery of standards with those wishing to identify which standards do
27、 or do not exist to cover a particular subject area; 3) supporting standards developers and working groups to identify subject areas in which there are gaps in available standards; 4) assisting those formulating a New Work Item Proposal to specify a scope that avoids overlap with other standards or
28、omissions in the coverage of a subject area; 5) helping member bodies to verify the need for a proposed new work item; 6) enabling those promoting or educating on the use of standards to develop resources that focus coherently on a portfolio of related standards. 2 T erms and definitio ns 2.1 concep
29、t units of thought constituted through abstraction on the basis of properties common to a set of objects ENV 12443:1999 2.2 framework logical structure for classifying and organising complex information FEAF:1999 TECHNICAL REPORT ISO/TR 13054:2012(E) ISO 2012 All rights reserved 1 ISO/TR 13054:2012(
30、E) 2.3 knowledge management range of practices used by organizations to identify, create, represent and distribute knowledge to support learning and decision making 2.4 maturity of an information system state of a system, demonstrated by special characteristics and behaviour, that permits it to oper
31、ate better in accordance with its business goals as a result of transformation and adoption NOTE Adapted from OSIMM. 2.5 maturity model means of and scale for evaluating and assessing the current state of maturity NOTE Adapted from OSIMM. 2.6 ontology organization of concepts for which a rational ar
32、gument can be made NOTE Adapted from ISO/TS 17117. 3 Symbols and abbreviated terms SKMT Standards Knowledge Management Tool HIS-KR Health Informatics Standards Knowledge Resource 4 Overview 4.1 General In 2008 the joint initiative council for different standards development organizations (SDOs) dete
33、rmined the need for the provision of methods and tools so that clear basic information about existing and developing health information standards by the different SDOs could be available from a single source. The importance of creating a common glossary was emphasized and there was endorsement of th
34、e web portal, the Standards Knowledge Management Tool (SKMT) to host this need www.skmtglossary.org developed within ISO/TC 215. The starting point in health informatics standards developed by ISO/TC 215 and CEN/TC 251 involving other SDOs such as HL7 and IHTSDO is the evolution of a single common h
35、ealth informatics glossary. The SKM approach is meant to be comprehensive and not exclude for example standards being developed by particular countries contributing to overall health informatics standards knowledge. A major objective is to be able to discover gaps in current standards and help orien
36、tate future standards development and utilization, as well as enhanced communication between standards developers and standards users. 4.2 Issues of knowledge management Knowledge management has two primary components, learning and decision making. It relates to particular contexts and affects indiv
37、iduals as well as teams and collaborators. It has the characteristic of being cyclical in that learning changes decisions and results of decisions enable learning. Issues concern: access to knowledge; understanding of knowledge which relates to interest, education and experience; 2 ISO 2012 All righ
38、ts reserved ISO/TR 13054:2012(E) quality of knowledge representation and clarity of specified underlying arguments; sensitivity to feedback and critique; adequate maintenance. 4.3 Knowledge structure 4.3.1 General Knowledge in documents needs a logical structure understandable to the reader. The sea
39、rching within the document is enabled by the way the knowledge is indexed, including by word search, key word, term, and theme. Some knowledge is organized in databases. Health informatics is of course interested in standardization of terminologies and ways of making links between concepts of relate
40、d meaning. This is an area of active research in health and bio-informatics. The knowledge found in standards however is not entirely made up of nuggets of discrete information that can be precisely labelled for relatively independent scrutiny, but carefully nuanced descriptions providing context an
41、d interpretation. Thus it makes more sense to be able to refer to a particular knowledge area or theme at the same time providing context information that may be provided in different ways, also ensuring that this is done meaningfully to the particular user seeking this knowledge. 4.3.2 Ontologies a
42、nd frameworks 4.3.2.1 General Knowledge areas can be represented in ontologies, that is a formal modelling showing these areas and their relationships. In line with the argument of 5.2 it should be possible to model relationships between knowledge areas, but difficult to model detailed content of a
43、given knowledge area. A major criterion for choosing an ontology should be that this model should have pragmatic usefulness, in that it makes sense to a broad group of users and can enable rapid location of a knowledge area while understanding the role of that knowledge area in relation to the whole
44、. The model has a visual representation that is coherent to the person who wishes to explore the perspectives of knowledge captured by the model. An example would be that the ontology of a home has components such as a house with kitchen, bedroom etc., and a garden with swimming pool. shed etc. Each
45、 component might have a sub-ontology e.g. a kitchen has sink, counters etc. Suppose that you are interested in building materials and their deployment, a different ontology for materials could be useful such as plumbing, masonry, carpentry, paint etc. Again each component could have a sub-ontology s
46、uch as properties, colours and prices of paint. Clearly a component of one ontology such as paint could be of relevance to several components of another ontology such as the different rooms in the house. It is then possible to make a link between the kitchen and a subset of paints that are suitable
47、for indoor kitchen use; thus a link is made between ontologies. The notion of an ontology in this discussion is strongly related to that of a framework defined in ISO/TS 18308 as a logical structure for classifying and organizing complex information. In general, an ontology may have more components
48、than a framework and can represent in more detail the relations between components. 4.3.2.2 Linking or merging ontologies A natural tendency is to enable as many cross-links between concepts as possible so that none are missed. However as discussed above in the example of a house it is easier to mov
49、e between domains or sub-domains of knowledge to observe and understand relationships between them, rather than a plethora of point to point relationships. An example might be that different health care delivery settings relate to a common set of role identifier and management standards. The link would point to the set rather than each standard, possibly helped by an explanation explaining relation and noting limitations if any. In this respect it should be easier to enable links between ontologies rather than merging. Each onto
