Hi Simon,
HealthLink does not create messages of any kind. It provides message delivery, security and related support. We do however have an interest in working with AHML because our system performs inline message validation, I.e. we check that a message conforms with the stated message type prior to transmission. This saves a lot of headaches at the other end. Thus we check our validation profiles with AHML's and work closely with them on an ongoing basis. We are a bit tired of the lunatic fringe going on about how we and other messaging vendors are not AHML accredited, however I guess that just emphasizes how little they understand the subject matter. We also have a broader interest in working with AHML and that is on our quality agenda, where we have worked collaboratively with Chris over quite a period on the draft code of practice for messaging service providers; something we think will rapidly become a prerequisite safety/quality standard for all those involved in clinical messaging. Hope this helps, Tom Tom Bowden <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Chief Executive Tel: +64 9 638 0670 Mobile: +64 21 874 154 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Web: www.healthlink.net <http://www.healthlink.net/> <http://www.healthlink.net/> Connecting The Health Sector -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Simon James Sent: Thursday, 3 May 2007 12:42 p.m. To: GPCG Talk Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [GPCG_TALK] AHML - for clinical or messaging solutions? > > Tim Churches wrote: >> So yes, nice that AHML exists, and they should continue their work >> and continue to be funded (by whom?), but don't treat their >> assessment of your messages as the Word of Deity-of-your-choice. >> Instead use it as a filter to target careful re-examination of the >> messages or aspects they flag as errors, but do use your critical faculties in doing so. >> >> Tim C >> >> > We at Argus have done just that. We pass our messages thru the AHML > free test facility and this is a guide to us to locate obvious errors > whilst development is taking place. A 'certification' at this stage > could not be justified on cost/benefit basis. > Ross Davey > > ArgusConnect CC: Chris Lynton-Moll (Executive Director of AHML) Can this point be clarified for the list please Tom/Ross/Andrew/Chris? Is there any need for message "transport" solutions to be certified by AHML? As it is the clinical application (or clinical part of the application suite) that generates both the message and the application level ACKs (or doesn't), I've always been under the impression that it is the clinical application (or clinical part of the application suite) that needs to be compliant with AHML requirements? Surely message transport (integrity of security, speed through the system, cost, availability etc) is completely independent of the contents of the message, and should be tested accordingly? Thanks, Simon -- Simon James Publisher Pulse+IT M: 0402 149 859 F: 02 9475 0029 E: [EMAIL PROTECTED] W: http://www.pulsemagazine.com.au PO Box 52 Coogee NSW 2034 _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
