On Wed, 17 Apr 2002, Christian Heller wrote: ... > > modules? How do I make sure what I added will work with other > > people's ideas for describing the psychiatry domain? > > You are right. That's the point. But as long as OpenEHR/GEHR is still > in a research phase, it is more workable for us to use our own Domain/ > ER model for prototyping and useable results. We know that it will > have to be changed towards OpenEHR Archetypes in the next few years.
Hi Christian, I am not sure what's happening with GEHR and OpenEHR. They seem to have suffered delays related to raising funds and delivering code. On the other hand, the OIO project is alive and prospering. :-) We had several long threads comparing OIO to GEHR on the OpenHealth list (archived by openhealth.com). For example: http://www.shout.net/~milan/research/IN.openhealth/1651.html > I hope most of us agree that OpenEHR is the better approach, ok, I agree. Of course, if OIO is a GEHR kernel, then you may not need to hold your breath for "usable results"? :-) ... > > I urge you to read Thomas Beale's excellent paper: > > http://www.deepthought.com.au/it/archetypes/Output/front.html > > Already did that. Great! So, in your view, what is the difference between GEHR/OpenEHR and OIO architecture? Best regards, Andrew --- Andrew P. Ho, M.D. OIO: Open Infrastructure for Outcomes www.TxOutcome.Org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
