On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 19:31, Dr Horst Herb wrote: >> Believe me - you don't stand a chance at all against me and my own program - but the point I was trying before is that different people have different workflows. I suppose nobody else would cope with my program for example as it is now, but I myself thrive. Imagine typing "dx phar<tab>" and a list selection appears with diagnoses starting with "pharyngitis" - within your progress notes!, without changing focus to a different place of your screen! Hit enter, and write "rx pnc<tab>" and it autocompletes to "Prescribed: Phenoxymethylpenicillin potassium 500mg 1 tablet 4 times daily for 7-10 days" Hit enter and write mc+3d<tab><enter> and it creates a medical certificate for the next three days. Now hit Ctrl+P and it prints both all accumulated scripts, the medical certificate, and whatever else has accumulated in the print queue for that patient. It prints immediately, no delay, no dialog boxes etc. because the print options are all pre-configured of course Two assumptions: 1.) it would be very, very hard to make anything more efficient. Maybe even impossible? 2.) most people won't like it at all, and never would remember most commands let alone bother learning them in the first place It follows again that different people with different preferences need different software. I don't believe there ever will be a single "suits all and everybody" software product for general practice unless it is so configurable that it will appear as dozens of different products to the end users after customization - but taking into account that probably a majority (?51%) will be reasonably happy with a standard configuration because they don't know better and can't be bothered to learn better either. Horst << I think the second of the two assumptions is debatable. If the shortcuts are mere idiosyncratic text processing macros then you are probably right. The leverage in using these shortcuts is as a means for the worthwhile end of generating molecular codes. These shortcuts by necessity need to be formalised (EBNF) to check for "well-formedness" and parsed to a system of molecular coded expressions. Then it can be "conventionalised", then it can be a protocol for communication with machines and humans. Then it can help with story telling and retelling in healthcare. Docletalk the "emoticon charged interface language" was presented at the racgp12/hic2003 conference in Sydney regarding use of such shortcuts - see Pg 157 of handbook. The critters get parsed into a series of plausible coded doclescript statements. Docle/doclescript is the target of such parsing as they handle post coordination rather well. Some examples of algorithmic transformation of docletalk -> doclescript-> post-coordinated molecular docles: ra :) w diclo -> &[EMAIL PROTECTED],outx[better],with[diclofenac] ->rheua:eval,outx:bett,with:dicl rx cial f ed -> &[EMAIL PROTECTED],for[impotence] -> tada:rx,for:impo impo:rx,with:tada ra :(( or ra :-(( -> &[EMAIL PROTECTED],outx[much,worse] -> rheua:eval,outx:much,wors ra :(( w gold injection -> &[EMAIL PROTECTED],outx[much,worse],with[aurothioGlucose]-> rheua:eval,outx:much,wors,with:aurog hx pnd f 2/12 -> &[EMAIL PROTECTED],for[2/12] -> pnd:hxpx,for:2/12 The point of all these molecular coding? A group practice can be a learning community with the use of such molecular codes - a simple SQL query comprising a search criterion: LIKE 'rheua%bett%with:%' will throw up the treatment secrets of your fellow colleagues in their approach to rheumatoid arthritis. While the search criterion: LIKE 'rheua%wors%with:%' will recommend what treatment not to use based on practice experience. Cheers Kuang Docle - more speed less haze. |
_______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
