James wrote:
AMA guidelines- Hmmm? Legally and ethical and logic do not seem to fit in
many places Ash.
RACGP sets most GP standards including several privacy related guidelines
which are then adopted by accreditation bodies like AGPAL.
these were actually the guidelines endorsed and i think co-authored by
the then gpcg (like in our mailing address) when they had some say
before being gioven over to the possibly dark side (nehta)
i say possibly, because like most gp's (and probably most informatics
types) i haven't got any real idea what nehta are actually doing
hmmm.... and i'm not sure they do either, though i digress
Many doctors are have great computer "technical literacy".
and sophisticated language skills too (or at least typing skills?)
The ones who do not need help. It is unfortunate that the help is not funded or
where it is
the bruacy scares off many practices. The help and support provided by
Divisions is good but not used by many people.
and not used at all by non-mdw3 owners ttbomk; why is it that the
support is free for a monopoly software owned by the single biggest
owner of corporate practices, and virtually non-existent for all other
softwares ?
Mind you the new AMA president might be able to kick topics like this into
shape. It is so good to have the AMA back from being a Yes Minister type
toothless extension of the Medicare office. ( where was that ama application
form- lol)
(reaches for tongue extraction device i think....... )
:-P ash
_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
