At 9:57 am +1100 19/3/06, Tim Churches wrote:
[...]
How can we harness contributions from people like Peter Machell, or
Horst herb, or David Guest, or Tony Lembke, or Tony Eviston, or John
Dooley, or Duncan Guy, or Liz Dodds, or Ian Haywood, or many, many
others who have lots of useful, really practical things to contribute to
health IT standards development but no time to sit in committee meetings?
A spot of reform wouldn't go astray, methinks. What do others think?
All those people are able to comment freely on standards at "public
comment" stage with minimal time investment.
A recent round of public comment on a document I recall produced a
small number (?3-4) substantive comments. One of the people listed
was a (the) major contributor, and those comments resulted in
substantial changes. And we did try to push the process to see the
comment resolution documents fed back or made public, but there are
apparently privacy issues in that.
Suggestions for new standards are welcomed.
As I said, there is always room for improvement. But few changes ever
result from random action at the sidelines.
Ian.
--
Dr Ian R Cheong, BMedSc, FRACGP, GradDipCompSc, MBA(Exec)
Health Informatics Consultant, Brisbane, Australia
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(for urgent matters, please send a copy to my practice email as well:
[EMAIL PROTECTED])
PRIVACY NOTE
I am happy for others to forward on email sent by me to public email lists.
Please ask my permission first if you wish to forward private email
to other parties.
_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
