Motivations (and potentially interested parties):

• The Architecture Working Group has started to consider API specifications for Concept Sets and we need better understanding to determine the costs or benefits of attempting to accommodate or synchronize with standards and efforts beyond OHDSI. Also, the (currently suspended) Vocabulary-Visualization Working Group and people working on vocabulary system interfaces should not proceed while Concept Set specifications are liable to significant change
• The FHIR Working Group has yet to establish guidelines on mapping or interfacing between OHDSI and FHIR vocabulary and value set services
• The CDM Working Group and the OHDSI collaborator community at large must consider whether and when and how our standards and tools interoperate with those in other domains that depend on electronic health data

Possible discussion topics:

• OHDSI's Vocabulary System and other meta-terminology standards and resources
  • Which others? (UMLS, CTS2, FHIR, etc., plus many commercial offerings)
  • Are they alternatives, competitors, cousins, allies, or what? How are they relevant to us?
• OHDSI's Concept Sets and similar standards and resources
  • Which others? (VSAC, FHIR, PCORNet, Sentinel, commercial…)
  • How do they relate to phenotypes and other functional or conceptual entities in the OHDSI framework?
  • Long-term vision and short-term strategies for interoperability, reuse, modification, sharing, curation
    • How should we relate these to external standards and resources, if at all?
    • And at what level? Concept/Value Set or Phenotype?
• Are there usable, open source tools that we should consider leveraging for our vocab/concept set efforts?
• Who can we bring into the discussion to help us understand and discuss these issues?

Clarification: This is proposed as a study group, not a forum for making decisions. If we arrive at any answers or recommendations, we will bring them to the appropriate working groups. Hopefully members of relevant working groups will join us.