We are treating the patient as the primary focus for the record, which
is logical most of the time. Maybe we should look at other ways ?condition
R
Tim Churches wrote:
Jon David Patrick wrote:
My motivation for using EMF is to bring into the foreground the range of
issues that "electronic" introduces to its management and manipulation.
Following this line of argument and Tim's point about images the F should
stand for Folder, so EMF is Electronic Medical Folder.
But a folder is a bit of bent cardboard... and X-rays are kept in envelopes.
I remain unconvinced that there is anything wrong with the term "medical
record" or "health record", electronic or otherwise.
I can understand Richard's frustration with archetypes and their slow
arrival but I don't think that is the result of trying to get at the
fundamental aspects of the "system" to be modelled but rather it is an
attempt to model a very large volume of detail, so that they are caught in
the trees without seeing the forest.
They seem to be developing a system for precisely and formally
describing the cellular structure of the veins on the back of the leaves
on the trees in the forest. It is a lengthy process...
_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
