Last week we participated in the annual North American IHE connecathon with our reference implementation of an Interoperability Layer and Shared Health Record. These systems were setup to act as a single system for the purposes of the connecatthon testing. The OpenHIM handled all the security and audit logging concerns and was itself also tested as a ATNA Audit Repository. The OpenSHR was setup behind the OpenHIM’s security infrastructure and was tested for XDS.b compliance, it’s ability to import CDA documents discretely and it’s ability to support on-demand documents.
Overall, the testing was very successful and we were to pass almost all of our assigned tests. There were only two that we were unable to pass. The first is the importing of APS documents. Unfortunately, there was no-one to test this profile with this year so we were unable to perform the required tests for this profile. The second one is the on-demand documents option for an XDS.b document registry actor. Unfortunately, we ran into a bug in the on-demand document implementation in the registry and were unable to fix this in the little time we had remaining to complete this test. However, we did manage to test and pass the on-demand documents option as a document source, which is where most of the on-demand document functionality lies.
As an outcome of this process we were able to find and fix a few bugs in our implementations and prove once again that we can connect and share documents with multiple partners. We also found that the use of OpenXDS as our document registry is becoming a burden. The code base is old, messy and hard to build. We had to pipe the audits produced by OpenXDS through a mediator to convert them to the correct DICOM audit format. We also struggled with a bug that prevented us from completing the on-demand document registry test (as mentioned above). We also found a number of problems with it during our pre-connnecathon test. It is becoming clear that we need to find a new solution for a XDS.b registry. Fortunately, it is easy to plug another one in due to conformance to the XDS.b profile, however, we need to do some research to find a suitable open source replacement (if one exists).
Here is a summary of our connecathon results for the OpenHIM and the OpenSHR:
I have also attached a detailed report for those interested. Here are some interesting stats that I pulled out of the report:
We got 99 test instances verified
Our most verified test was ATNA audit logging where we were acting as a audit repository. We successfully tested with 25 audit partners.
XDS.b itself accounted for 47% of the tests that we performed.
We tested with 38 different organisations.
A big thanks to Hannes from Jembi and Mo and Nityan from Mohawk college for getting all these tests done and making it such a successful (and enjoyable) week! Also, thanks to Jennifer for getting us what we needed logistically, the name cards where particularly helpful.
Well done Ryan and team! This is outstanding work.
Shaun
···
On Feb 2, 2016 6:13 AM, Ryan Crichton ryan@jembi.org wrote:
Hi all,
Last week we participated in the annual North American IHE connecathon with our reference implementation of an Interoperability Layer and Shared Health Record. These systems were setup to act as a single system for the purposes of the connecatthon testing.
The OpenHIM handled all the security and audit logging concerns and was itself also tested as a ATNA Audit Repository. The OpenSHR was setup behind the OpenHIM’s security infrastructure and was tested for XDS.b compliance, it’s ability to import CDA documents
discretely and it’s ability to support on-demand documents.
Overall, the testing was very successful and we were to pass almost all of our assigned tests. There were only two that we were unable to pass. The first is the importing of APS documents. Unfortunately, there was no-one to test this profile with this
year so we were unable to perform the required tests for this profile. The second one is the on-demand documents option for an XDS.b document registry actor. Unfortunately, we ran into a bug in the on-demand document implementation in the registry and were
unable to fix this in the little time we had remaining to complete this test. However, we did manage to test and pass the on-demand documents option as a document source, which is where most of the on-demand document functionality lies.
As an outcome of this process we were able to find and fix a few bugs in our implementations and prove once again that we can connect and share documents with multiple partners. We also found that the use of OpenXDS as our document registry is becoming
a burden. The code base is old, messy and hard to build. We had to pipe the audits produced by OpenXDS through a mediator to convert them to the correct DICOM audit format. We also struggled with a bug that prevented us from completing the on-demand document
registry test (as mentioned above). We also found a number of problems with it during our pre-connnecathon test. It is becoming clear that we need to find a new solution for a XDS.b registry. Fortunately, it is easy to plug another one in due to conformance
to the XDS.b profile, however, we need to do some research to find a suitable open source replacement (if one exists).
Here is a summary of our connecathon results for the OpenHIM and the OpenSHR:
I have also attached a detailed report for those interested. Here are some interesting stats that I pulled out of the report:
We got 99 test instances verified
Our most verified test was ATNA audit logging where we were acting as a audit repository. We successfully tested with 25 audit partners.
XDS.b itself accounted for 47% of the tests that we performed.
We tested with 38 different organisations.
A big thanks to Hannes from Jembi and Mo and Nityan from Mohawk college for getting all these tests done and making it such a successful (and enjoyable) week! Also, thanks to Jennifer for getting us what we needed logistically, the name cards where particularly
helpful.
Cheers,
Ryan
–
Ryan Crichton
Lead Developer, Jembi Health Systems | SOUTH AFRICA
Ryan, Hannes, Mo and Nityan,
Thanks to all who worked toward testing conformance for the IL and SHR.
Jennifer
···
On Feb 2, 2016, at 7:12 AM, Ryan Crichton ryan@jembi.org wrote:
Hi all,
Last week we participated in the annual North American IHE connecathon with our reference implementation of an Interoperability Layer and Shared Health Record. These systems were setup to act as a single system for the purposes of the connecatthon
testing. The OpenHIM handled all the security and audit logging concerns and was itself also tested as a ATNA Audit Repository. The OpenSHR was setup behind the OpenHIM’s security infrastructure and was tested for XDS.b compliance, it’s ability to import CDA
documents discretely and it’s ability to support on-demand documents.
Overall, the testing was very successful and we were to pass almost all of our assigned tests. There were only two that we were unable to pass. The first is the importing of APS documents. Unfortunately, there was no-one to test this profile with
this year so we were unable to perform the required tests for this profile. The second one is the on-demand documents option for an XDS.b document registry actor. Unfortunately, we ran into a bug in the on-demand document implementation in the registry and
were unable to fix this in the little time we had remaining to complete this test. However, we did manage to test and pass the on-demand documents option as a document source, which is where most of the on-demand document functionality lies.
As an outcome of this process we were able to find and fix a few bugs in our implementations and prove once again that we can connect and share documents with multiple partners. We also found that the use of OpenXDS as our document registry is
becoming a burden. The code base is old, messy and hard to build. We had to pipe the audits produced by OpenXDS through a mediator to convert them to the correct DICOM audit format. We also struggled with a bug that prevented us from completing the on-demand
document registry test (as mentioned above). We also found a number of problems with it during our pre-connnecathon test. It is becoming clear that we need to find a new solution for a XDS.b registry. Fortunately, it is easy to plug another one in due to
conformance to the XDS.b profile, however, we need to do some research to find a suitable open source replacement (if one exists).
Here is a summary of our connecathon results for the OpenHIM and the OpenSHR:
<IL-SHR-connectathon-results-2016.png>
I have also attached a detailed report for those interested. Here are some interesting stats that I pulled out of the report:
We got 99 test instances verified
Our most verified test was ATNA audit logging where we were acting as a audit repository. We successfully tested with 25 audit partners.
XDS.b itself accounted for 47% of the tests that we performed.
We tested with 38 different organisations.
A big thanks to Hannes from Jembi and Mo and Nityan from Mohawk college for getting all these tests done and making it such a successful (and enjoyable) week! Also, thanks to Jennifer for getting us what we needed logistically, the name cards
where particularly helpful.
Cheers,
Ryan
–
Ryan Crichton
Lead Developer, Jembi Health Systems | SOUTH AFRICA
Awesome news, Ryan. Thanks to everyone for the hard work on this front.
At some point, we need to have an after-action-review of the IHE process to date, and get everyone’s take on it.
I get the sense that we’re starting to better find the value in what they are trying to do, and we are also getting close to having influence on what they do going forward. I’d love to get everyone’s insight on this.
On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 7:12 AM, Ryan Crichton ryan@jembi.org wrote:
Hi all,
Last week we participated in the annual North American IHE connecathon with our reference implementation of an Interoperability Layer and Shared Health Record. These systems were setup to act as a single system for the purposes of the connecatthon testing. The OpenHIM handled all the security and audit logging concerns and was itself also tested as a ATNA Audit Repository. The OpenSHR was setup behind the OpenHIM’s security infrastructure and was tested for XDS.b compliance, it’s ability to import CDA documents discretely and it’s ability to support on-demand documents.
Overall, the testing was very successful and we were to pass almost all of our assigned tests. There were only two that we were unable to pass. The first is the importing of APS documents. Unfortunately, there was no-one to test this profile with this year so we were unable to perform the required tests for this profile. The second one is the on-demand documents option for an XDS.b document registry actor. Unfortunately, we ran into a bug in the on-demand document implementation in the registry and were unable to fix this in the little time we had remaining to complete this test. However, we did manage to test and pass the on-demand documents option as a document source, which is where most of the on-demand document functionality lies.
As an outcome of this process we were able to find and fix a few bugs in our implementations and prove once again that we can connect and share documents with multiple partners. We also found that the use of OpenXDS as our document registry is becoming a burden. The code base is old, messy and hard to build. We had to pipe the audits produced by OpenXDS through a mediator to convert them to the correct DICOM audit format. We also struggled with a bug that prevented us from completing the on-demand document registry test (as mentioned above). We also found a number of problems with it during our pre-connnecathon test. It is becoming clear that we need to find a new solution for a XDS.b registry. Fortunately, it is easy to plug another one in due to conformance to the XDS.b profile, however, we need to do some research to find a suitable open source replacement (if one exists).
Here is a summary of our connecathon results for the OpenHIM and the OpenSHR:
I have also attached a detailed report for those interested. Here are some interesting stats that I pulled out of the report:
We got 99 test instances verified
Our most verified test was ATNA audit logging where we were acting as a audit repository. We successfully tested with 25 audit partners.
XDS.b itself accounted for 47% of the tests that we performed.
We tested with 38 different organisations.
A big thanks to Hannes from Jembi and Mo and Nityan from Mohawk college for getting all these tests done and making it such a successful (and enjoyable) week! Also, thanks to Jennifer for getting us what we needed logistically, the name cards where particularly helpful.
Cheers,
Ryan
–
Ryan Crichton
Lead Developer, Jembi Health Systems | SOUTH AFRICA
Awesome news, Ryan. Thanks to everyone for the hard work on this front.
At some point, we need to have an after-action-review of the IHE process to date, and get everyone’s take on it.
I get the sense that we’re starting to better find the value in what they are trying to do, and we are also getting close to having influence on what they do going forward. I’d love to get everyone’s insight on this.
-Paul
–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “Shared Health Record (OpenHIE)” group.
On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 7:12 AM, Ryan Crichton ryan@jembi.org wrote:
Hi all,
Last week we participated in the annual North American IHE connecathon with our reference implementation of an Interoperability Layer and Shared Health Record. These systems were setup to act as a single system for the purposes of the connecatthon testing. The OpenHIM handled all the security and audit logging concerns and was itself also tested as a ATNA Audit Repository. The OpenSHR was setup behind the OpenHIM’s security infrastructure and was tested for XDS.b compliance, it’s ability to import CDA documents discretely and it’s ability to support on-demand documents.
Overall, the testing was very successful and we were to pass almost all of our assigned tests. There were only two that we were unable to pass. The first is the importing of APS documents. Unfortunately, there was no-one to test this profile with this year so we were unable to perform the required tests for this profile. The second one is the on-demand documents option for an XDS.b document registry actor. Unfortunately, we ran into a bug in the on-demand document implementation in the registry and were unable to fix this in the little time we had remaining to complete this test. However, we did manage to test and pass the on-demand documents option as a document source, which is where most of the on-demand document functionality lies.
As an outcome of this process we were able to find and fix a few bugs in our implementations and prove once again that we can connect and share documents with multiple partners. We also found that the use of OpenXDS as our document registry is becoming a burden. The code base is old, messy and hard to build. We had to pipe the audits produced by OpenXDS through a mediator to convert them to the correct DICOM audit format. We also struggled with a bug that prevented us from completing the on-demand document registry test (as mentioned above). We also found a number of problems with it during our pre-connnecathon test. It is becoming clear that we need to find a new solution for a XDS.b registry. Fortunately, it is easy to plug another one in due to conformance to the XDS.b profile, however, we need to do some research to find a suitable open source replacement (if one exists).
Here is a summary of our connecathon results for the OpenHIM and the OpenSHR:
I have also attached a detailed report for those interested. Here are some interesting stats that I pulled out of the report:
We got 99 test instances verified
Our most verified test was ATNA audit logging where we were acting as a audit repository. We successfully tested with 25 audit partners.
XDS.b itself accounted for 47% of the tests that we performed.
We tested with 38 different organisations.
A big thanks to Hannes from Jembi and Mo and Nityan from Mohawk college for getting all these tests done and making it such a successful (and enjoyable) week! Also, thanks to Jennifer for getting us what we needed logistically, the name cards where particularly helpful.
Cheers,
Ryan
–
Ryan Crichton
Lead Developer, Jembi Health Systems | SOUTH AFRICA
Awesome news, Ryan. Thanks to everyone for the hard work on this front.
At some point, we need to have an after-action-review of the IHE process to date, and get everyone’s take on it.
I get the sense that we’re starting to better find the value in what they are trying to do, and we are also getting close to having influence on what they do going forward. I’d love to get everyone’s insight on this.
-Paul
On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 7:12 AM, Ryan Crichton ryan@jembi.org wrote:
Hi all,
Last week we participated in the annual North American IHE connecathon with our reference implementation of an Interoperability Layer and Shared Health Record. These systems were setup to act as a single system for the purposes of the connecatthon testing. The OpenHIM handled all the security and audit logging concerns and was itself also tested as a ATNA Audit Repository. The OpenSHR was setup behind the OpenHIM’s security infrastructure and was tested for XDS.b compliance, it’s ability to import CDA documents discretely and it’s ability to support on-demand documents.
Overall, the testing was very successful and we were to pass almost all of our assigned tests. There were only two that we were unable to pass. The first is the importing of APS documents. Unfortunately, there was no-one to test this profile with this year so we were unable to perform the required tests for this profile. The second one is the on-demand documents option for an XDS.b document registry actor. Unfortunately, we ran into a bug in the on-demand document implementation in the registry and were unable to fix this in the little time we had remaining to complete this test. However, we did manage to test and pass the on-demand documents option as a document source, which is where most of the on-demand document functionality lies.
As an outcome of this process we were able to find and fix a few bugs in our implementations and prove once again that we can connect and share documents with multiple partners. We also found that the use of OpenXDS as our document registry is becoming a burden. The code base is old, messy and hard to build. We had to pipe the audits produced by OpenXDS through a mediator to convert them to the correct DICOM audit format. We also struggled with a bug that prevented us from completing the on-demand document registry test (as mentioned above). We also found a number of problems with it during our pre-connnecathon test. It is becoming clear that we need to find a new solution for a XDS.b registry. Fortunately, it is easy to plug another one in due to conformance to the XDS.b profile, however, we need to do some research to find a suitable open source replacement (if one exists).
Here is a summary of our connecathon results for the OpenHIM and the OpenSHR:
I have also attached a detailed report for those interested. Here are some interesting stats that I pulled out of the report:
We got 99 test instances verified
Our most verified test was ATNA audit logging where we were acting as a audit repository. We successfully tested with 25 audit partners.
XDS.b itself accounted for 47% of the tests that we performed.
We tested with 38 different organisations.
A big thanks to Hannes from Jembi and Mo and Nityan from Mohawk college for getting all these tests done and making it such a successful (and enjoyable) week! Also, thanks to Jennifer for getting us what we needed logistically, the name cards where particularly helpful.
Cheers,
Ryan
–
Ryan Crichton
Lead Developer, Jembi Health Systems | SOUTH AFRICA
