50 likes | 192 Views
CTMS/PopSci SIG Face to Face Meeting Summary. May 9 – 10, 2011 Little Rock, AR. Overview Day 1. 93 Meeting Attendees Greeting by Dr. Dan Rahn , UAMS Chancellor Morning Agenda Items Future and Direction of caBIG Program John Speakman Introduced Tony Kerlavage and Lisa Cole
E N D
CTMS/PopSci SIG Face to Face Meeting Summary May 9 – 10, 2011 Little Rock, AR
Overview Day 1 • 93 Meeting Attendees • Greeting by Dr. Dan Rahn, UAMS Chancellor • Morning Agenda Items • Future and Direction of caBIG Program • John Speakman • Introduced Tony Kerlavage and Lisa Cole • Overall goal of program • Focuses on the cancer community • Catalyzes academic development of novel biomedical informatics capabilities • Notional workflow proposed • Breakout discussion topics presented • Is there a proposal for how we move forward? • Open Source Software Communities • Dan Housman • Panel Discussion of caTissue as Open Source Case Study • Ian Fore, JuliKlemm, Dan Housman
Overview Day 1 • Afternoon Agenda Items • Clinical Trial Suite Adoption at UAMS • Mayo Research and Participant Tracking (Ptrax) • Breakout groups • Discussed overall caBIG goals from morning session • Focus on capabilities needed • Research community engagement • Standards and interoperability • Develop scientific software capabilities • Communicate about capabilities • Share best practices • Much discussion of the notion of 'unmet needs' • We are creating solutions that are meeting needs of the community. • Evening Reception at UAMS/Rockefeller Cancer Institute
Overview Day 2 • Morning Agenda Items • UAMS process for choosing Clinical Trials Suite • UAMS and caBIG support for National Children’s Study • Breakout sessions • NCI Priorities from BSA Report
Summary • Many Interactive Discussions • Breakout Session Results • Open Source • Need to include developers, all types of community members • End-user/Scientific community engagement – • Recognizing ways to engage with the end user community • Scientific Community viewpoint - collaboration and not competition • Standards Collaboration • Use cases come out of CRF work • Improving uptake and deployment, sustaining the current user base • Need to engage the role of domain experts and recognize contributions • More support for deployment • Alternate approaches to vendor engagement • Included a suggestion to gather information about vendor experience