Looking for DCMR background information - DICOM

This is a discussion on Looking for DCMR background information - DICOM ; Hello everybody, as all questions to this group are answered so quickly and satisfactorily, I dare another one: How do I get background information on PS 3.16 AKA DCMR? The introduction of PS 3.16 consists of one sentence only, which ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Looking for DCMR background information

  1. Looking for DCMR background information

    Hello everybody,

    as all questions to this group are answered so quickly and satisfactorily, I
    dare another one:

    How do I get background information on PS 3.16 AKA DCMR?
    The introduction of PS 3.16 consists of one sentence only, which leaves some
    questions open:

    - Who is overall responsible for the development of PS 3.16? WG-08 (SR)?
    - Is there an intended structure in the naming of CIDs? Are CIDs and TIDs
    related in any way? Is the sequence of Context Groups purely arbitrary or does
    it carry information? Will annex B (context groups) ever have subsections like
    annex A?
    - What is the historical reason, that some fields like ECG, heart catheter
    examinations, Mammo- & Chest-CAD are so well represented in the DCMR? Is this
    dependent on some enthusiastic professional association, triggered by modality
    manufacturers or by national health initiatives?
    - What is the future direction of PS 3.16? Which fields are worked on most
    heavily? Who is working?

    As a little thank you, here a "nano" CP for PS 3.16-2008:
    - CG 7000: Cardiac Catheteization Report (spelling mistake, missing "r")
    - CG 6094: QuaLItative Concepts for Usage, Exposure Frequency (spelling
    mistake upper case letters)
    - CG 7001 "Diagnostic Imaging Report Headings" and CG 6052 "Breast Imaging
    Report section title" carry concepts with comparable semantics and should thus
    be named uniformly (I'd prefer "Section Titles", plural with capital letters
    seems most common)

    Best regards and have a nice day,

    Winfried

  2. Re: Looking for DCMR background information

    Hi Winfried

    Winfried Schoech wrote:
    > Hello everybody,
    >
    > as all questions to this group are answered so quickly and
    > satisfactorily, I dare another one:
    >
    > How do I get background information on PS 3.16 AKA DCMR?
    > The introduction of PS 3.16 consists of one sentence only, which leaves
    > some questions open:
    >
    > - Who is overall responsible for the development of PS 3.16? WG-08 (SR)?


    WG 6 has overall responsibility, WG 8 used to develop content but
    is quiescent, the modality-specific groups do application-specific
    templates (e.g., WG 15 is doing Colon CAD right now).

    > - Is there an intended structure in the naming of CIDs? Are CIDs and
    > TIDs related in any way? Is the sequence of Context Groups purely
    > arbitrary or does it carry information? Will annex B (context groups)
    > ever have subsections like annex A?


    No, no, no and no.

    > - What is the historical reason, that some fields like ECG, heart
    > catheter examinations, Mammo- & Chest-CAD are so well represented in the
    > DCMR? Is this dependent on some enthusiastic professional association,
    > triggered by modality manufacturers or by national health initiatives?


    Each had a champion, usual a vendor/user pair, or an entire WG
    interested in doing the development work. National health initiatives
    have not so far produced anything.

    > - What is the future direction of PS 3.16? Which fields are worked on
    > most heavily? Who is working?


    Review the DICOM strategy document, and the work item requests
    and approvals from the DICOM Standards Committee minutes.

    > As a little thank you, here a "nano" CP for PS 3.16-2008:
    > - CG 7000: Cardiac Catheteization Report (spelling mistake, missing "r")
    > - CG 6094: QuaLItative Concepts for Usage, Exposure Frequency (spelling
    > mistake upper case letters)


    I will fix these, thanks.

    > - CG 7001 "Diagnostic Imaging Report Headings" and CG 6052 "Breast
    > Imaging Report section title" carry concepts with comparable semantics
    > and should thus be named uniformly (I'd prefer "Section Titles", plural
    > with capital letters seems most common)


    We debate about this sort of thing endlessly without every reaching
    consensus on consistency.

    David

+ Reply to Thread