Tony Grivell wrote:
> I agree with both aspects of Thomas's argument. In terms of future > practical "longitudinal" use of the data, the effective time-precision > will be set much more by the month than the day. However, it's also > true that there _may_ be some other (presently-unimagined) use for the > more-precisely defined day - which argues in favour of it being recorded. one use case I was trying to imagine was - what if the remembered date corresponded to some other significant date in the patient's history, and doctors were trying to figure out say medications or other interventions which the patient was unsure about about/couldn't remember. So let's say there is an admission for 15/dec/1990 (start of an episode where a fracture was treated), and at some later time, the patient is telling their GP that on the "15th of I forget what month near the end of 1990, I fractured my leg". The GP might review the record and think that the two dates were probably the same, and that it was therefore the same fracture. I would guess that this is a real contrived long shot, and probably unrealistic, but we need some more evidence from clinicians... - thomas beale - If you have any questions about using this list, please send a message to d.lloyd at openehr.org
