On Thursday 08 March 2007 09:23, Oliver Frank wrote:
> Tim Churches wrote:
> > There's only one thing worse than a paper-based screening register that
> > ought to be electronic, and that's *two* paper-based screening registers
> > that ought to be electronic...
>
> Such as a State-run cervical screening register which employs a bunch of
> public servants who busily type in details of women aged 18-70 (or
> whatever it is) and a separate State-run screening mammography register
> which employs another bunch of public servants to busily type in details
> about many of the same women, unbeknownst to each other, and each of
> which bunches of public servants runs its own separate paper-based
> communciations with the women and with GPs?
And then there are all sorts of interesting points
You can start with the electoral roll, like BreastScreen NSW, and miss people
or you can start with HIC data and get a different set of people - some DVA
people aren't on Medicare lists at all.
--
If I set here and stare at nothing long enough, people might think
I'm an engineer working on something.
-- S.R. McElroy
_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
