Hi Tim, I continue to struggle with the complexity of what is going on in the EHR Standards and implementation space.
I wrote an article for my blog which reflects a more general concern yesterday - that others seem to share - regarding the frameworks for and implementation status of not only openEHR, but also HL7 V3.0, SNOMED CT and CEN/ISO 13606. I wonder if we may not have bitten off just a bit more than we can intellectually chew with all this and may need to try for a simpler and more accessible way forward. I am more than prepared to admit the nuances of all this have me beat. See my blog article (address below) for some rambling thoughts on all this. David ---- Dr David G More MB, PhD, FACHI Phone +61-2-9438-2851 Fax +61-2-9906-7038 Skype Username : davidgmore E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] HealthIT Blog - www.aushealthit.blogspot.com On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 08:49:35 +1100, Tim Churches wrote: > David Guest wrote: >>> The data is identified as such and grouped in a hierarchy. But its >>> description and constraints are entirely open and undefined. I guess its a useful >>> lowest common denominator >>> >> >> Does anyone think openEHR will ever produce the goods? >> > There has been correspondence on the openhealth mailing list regarding this > issue recently. David More quipped about "geological timescales", perhaps with > some justification. To summarise and paraphrase (accuratey I hope) the > thread: the openEHR people assure us that several private firms are using openEHR- > based systems in deployed proprietary vertical health apps, and that lots of > profs and students in various universities are studying and tinkering with it. > The openEHR specifications have been accepted as a proposed standard (but not > ratified or approved as a standard as yet). Furthermore, Ocean Informatics and > the openEHR Foundation are themselves working on a suite of tools which > actually implement the ideas behind openEHR, but these tools are in different stages > of completeness: tools to define and edit openEHR archetype definitions are > complete and available as open source. Tools to actually store and retrieve data > using openEHR archetypes are at alpha or beta stages in the openEHR secret > laboratory, but have not been fully tested and are not ready for production use. > Thomas Beale has offered access to an openEHR engine hosted in the Ocean > Informatics labs, to be accessed via a proprietary Web service interface requiring > the use of a Microsoft C# .NET DLL on the client side, for capability-testing > purposes by interested parties (contact Thomas Beale at Ocean Informatics if > you are interested). All these openEHR tools still under development may or > may not be open sourced in the future - the Ocean Informatics and openEHR people > need to investigate business models. Other parts of the openEHR puzzle, such > as a shared library of openEHR archetype definitions, and a full query language, > are still on the drawing board or in only early stages of implementation. Oh, > there is also an open source version of an openEHR storage/retrieval kernel > being written in Sweden, but it is not yet complete either. > > I asked the same questions of the Ocean Informatics and openEHR people in > 2003, and after much email correspondence and head scratching, I was assured that > usable, production-quality openEHR implementations would be available quite > soon. The same assurances were given just a few weeks ago. I conclude that they > are indeed a bit further along now with actual implementation than they were > three years ago, but still have quite a way to go, but it is very hard to > extrapolate the progress line to divine when it might cross the V1.0 > boundary, although the fact that they were working on GEHR (the predecessor to openEHR) > about 15 years ago, and the openEHR has been going for nearly a decade might > provide some clues. Perhaps the remaining distance is being halved with every > passing year? Or perhaps I am just a cynical bastard? > > Tim C > _______________________________________________ > Gpcg_talk mailing list > [email protected] > http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk > > __________ NOD32 1920 (20061213) Information __________ > > This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. > http://www.eset.com
_______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
