Follow-up call 27 January 2015 Danish e-Health Atlas Follow-up call ISA Programme Action 2.1 27 January 23015

Follow-up call 27 January 2015 Item Topic 1. Pilot: specific plan 2. Documentation of the Danish e-Health Atlas in the CarTool 3. ArchiMate views using EIRA ABBs 4. Next steps

Follow-up call 27 January 2015 Danish e-Health Atlas 1. Pilot: specific plan ISA Programme Action 2.1 27 January 23015

Context: complex patient care 01 Pilot: specific plan Complex patient care: The Danish National e-Health Authority (Statens Serum Institute) wishes to improve the services provided to patients that take more kinds of medicine and have more contact with providers than most other patients. Overall goal: A better digital collaboration between municipal care units, general practitioners, and hospitals in the context of complex patient flows could for example lead to shared care plans between health care providers. These complex patient flows are at the centre of a larger cross-sectorial project that will take place in 2015. Expected benefits: The project is expected to result in benefits for the individual patient, in the form of improved quality of care, and for the Danish health system, in the form of a reduction in admissions, length of stay, outpatient visits, and visits to the general practitioner and nursing tasks in the municipal sector. http://www.ssi.dk/English/HealthdataandICT/The%20National%20eHealth%20Authority.aspx

Needs: Visualise and communicate 01 Pilot: specific plan One of the first steps in the project is to create an Atlas of e-Health solutions in Denmark that can be used by all stakeholders in the complex patient care project to: Visualise and communicate about existing solutions in the Danish e-Health landscape; Visualise and communicate about additional information needs; Visualise and communicate about a common vision for the digital support of interdisciplinary, complex patient care. http://www.ssi.dk/English/HealthdataandICT/The%20National%20eHealth%20Authority.aspx

Solution: E-Health Atlas 01 Pilot: specific plan The first version of the Danish e-Health Atlas will be created using the EIRA and the CarTool applying the use case ‘Document solution portfolio’. A CarTool documentation of the e-Health solution portfolio A number of ArchiMate views using EIRA ABBs: Organization viewpoint Product viewpoint Information structure viewpoint Application structure viewpoint http://www.ssi.dk/English/HealthdataandICT/The%20National%20eHealth%20Authority.aspx

Pilot: Specific plan 01 Pilot: specific plan Owner Task or milestone Target date January February March April   Use case document portfolio (atlas of e-Health) DK/EC Scope defined 30.1 DK E-Health Atlas documented in the CarTool using the data template excel file 4.2 & 5.2 E-Health Atlas views created 1.4 Provide support on the use of EIRA and CarTool EC/DK Status update conference call for the CarTool/EIRA 27.1 Status update conference call for the EIRA 30.4 EC Kick-off workshop 14 & 15.1 CarTool workshop in Copenhagen Provide feedback on the EIRA and the CarTool Pilot evaluation survey Presentation at ISA Coordination group TBC http://www.ssi.dk/English/HealthdataandICT/The%20National%20eHealth%20Authority.aspx

Pilot: Communication plan 01 Pilot: specific plan Main DK contact person: Mads Hjorth SPOC EC: Raul-Mario Abril-Jimenez SPOC EIRA: Stijn Goedertier SPOC CarTool: Costas Simatos Privately archived mailing list: eia-ms-pilots@joinup.ec.europa.eu http://joinup.ec.europa.eu/mailman/listinfo/eia-ms-pilots Joinup issue tracker: https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/asset/eia/issue/all (only for issues relevant to the general public) http://www.ssi.dk/English/HealthdataandICT/The%20National%20eHealth%20Authority.aspx

Follow-up call 27 January 2015 Danish e-Health Atlas 2. Documentation of the Danish e-Health Atlas in the CarTool ISA Programme Action 2.1 27 January 23015

E-Health Atlas: CarTool 02 CarTool No information has yet been captured in the Excel template. Feasibility of filling out the Excel sheet. I have spent about an hour trying to get my head around how to fill it out and I still don’t get the picture. When I see the phrase “the Danish eHealth solution” I worry if we are on the same page. I am trying to illustrate and overview of ~100 applications across many organisations. The focus is on the central national interoperability solutions, ~40 applications/systems/solutions. Basically I am worried if the effort trying to understand the spreadsheet and to type in thousand rows will be justified. How many hours should I plan to use on documenting solutions in the Excel sheet? The key concept I struggle to understand is ‘Solution’. To me a solution is the description of how to apply a number of components/elements to meet a (business) goal. E.g. we have a goal of subscribe and hand out medication. This is done using a very large number of components. Many components are reused in a number of other solutions. How is this ‘reuse’ best captured/illustrated in CarTool? http://www.ssi.dk/English/HealthdataandICT/The%20National%20eHealth%20Authority.aspx

E-Health Atlas: CarTool 02 CarTool Mads Hjorth: I did a small proof of concept on the use of XSLT to extract information from the Archi file. I think most of the queries I want to make into the Atlas can be done using small export / translations on the underlying XML. Would it be possible to extract the information needed in CarTool from Archimate in this way? http://www.ssi.dk/English/HealthdataandICT/The%20National%20eHealth%20Authority.aspx

Follow-up call 27 January 2015 Danish e-Health Atlas 3. ArchiMate views using EIRA ABBs ISA Programme Action 2.1 27 January 23015

E-Health Atlas: ArchiMate views 03 ArchiMate views using EIRA ABBs According to predefined ArchiMate viewspoints: Organization viewpoint: a view of decision-making structures; Product viewpoint: a view of the most important public services; Information structure viewpoint: a view of the most important data objects, not so much focused on the data models and their meaning, but mostly on the use of the data; and Application structure viewpoint: a view of the most common application and infrastructure components used in the Danish healthcare system. Views created using Archi 3.1.1 tool (under MIT open-source licence) and the ArchiMate® language (under several licence agreements) (ArchiMate® is a registered trademark of the Open Group) http://www.ssi.dk/English/HealthdataandICT/The%20National%20eHealth%20Authority.aspx

Issue: EIRA in ArchiMate views 03 ArchiMate views using EIRA ABBs Issue: How can EIRA be used in ArchiMate® views? Solutions: 1. Using realisation relationships 2. Using attributes 3. Using stereotypes + Multiple ABBs + Visualise relationships - Overload: both ABBs and SBBs - Realisation not between ABB-SBB + Views not overloaded + EIRA as ArchiMate extention - Not possible to visualise relationships - Multiple ABBs as stereotypes is a bit cumbersome https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/node/136974

Issue: EIRA in ArchiMate views 03 ArchiMate views using EIRA ABBs Issue: Clarify why Application Components are needed in EIRA In the application and infrastructure view, it is unclear to me if the application components are really needed. I believe we are aiming to identify multiple realizations of the same application services and/or application functions. So can we clarify what “using EIRA” in at this level?. Solutions: To be discussed https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/node/136974

Issue: EIRA in Archi Issue: Create a model of EIRA in Archi Solution: 03 ArchiMate views using EIRA ABBs Issue: Create a model of EIRA in Archi Solution: We have produced a first experimental version of the EIRA in Archi. This model introduces changes (regarding model concepts and colours) compared to release v0.8.3 of the EIRA. This version can serve as a basis for future work on the Archi/EIRA and future EIRA releases. When is a frozen v0.8.3 version to be expected? To be discussed… https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/node/136974

Issues: ABBs and semantic IOP 03 ArchiMate views using EIRA ABBs Issues: Add an ABB ‘Mapping’ to the Semantic View The word ‘business information entity (BIE)’ is confusing Where to place ‘Core Vocabularies’ within EIRA? Where to place ‘structural metadata management’ within EIRA? Solution: to be discussed internally with Action 1.1 project officers … answers will come later https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/node/136974

e-Health Atlas: Organization viewpoint 03 ArchiMate views using EIRA ABBs Feedback: The corresponding EIRA ABB could be ‘Service Provider’ and ‘User’ (see organisational view) It may be better to use a ‘Stakeholder’ model concept for this in ArchiMate (rather than a ‘Location’) https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/node/136974

e-Health Atlas: Product viewpoint 03 ArchiMate views using EIRA ABBs Feedback: The corresponding EIRA ABB could be ‘Public service’ The corresponding ArchiMate model concept should indeed be ‘Business Service’ https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/node/136974

e-Health Atlas: Information structure viewpoint 03 ArchiMate views using EIRA ABBs Feedback: The corresponding EIRA ABB could be ‘Data Entity’ The corresponding ArchiMate model concept should indeed be ‘Data Object’ https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/node/136974

e-Health Atlas: Application structure viewpoint 03 ArchiMate views using EIRA ABBs Feedback: Not every application component may have a corresponding EIRA ABB The corresponding ArchiMate model concept should indeed be ‘Application component’ https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/node/136974

?

EIRA Cartography tool Contact us For more information Project Officers Raul.Abril@ec.europa.eu Suzanne.Wigard@ec.europa.eu Hans.Vanderbeke@ec.europa.eu For more information EIRA European Interoperability Reference Architecture Cartography tool European Interoperability Cartography EIA Joinup community https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/asset/eia/description EIA project collaborative space https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/CITnet/confluence/display/EIA/EIA+Home ISA website http://ec.europa.eu/isa/index_en.htm ISA FAQ http://ec.europa.eu/isa/faq/faq_en.htm

This presentation was prepared for the ISA programme of the European Commission by PwC EU Services. The views expressed in this report are purely those of the authors and may not, in any circumstances, be interpreted as stating an official position of the European Commission. The European Commission does not guarantee the accuracy of the information included in this study, nor does it accept any responsibility for any use thereof. Reference herein to any specific products, specifications, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favouring by the European Commission. All care has been taken by the author to ensure that s/he has obtained, where necessary, permission to use any parts of manuscripts including illustrations, maps, and graphs, on which intellectual property rights already exist from the titular holder(s) of such rights or from her/his or their legal representative.