Hi Gerard,
Appreciate your post. It confirms a suspicion of mine that a workable
global solution, regardless of topic, is one where compatibility,
interoperability and usability are prime concerns, e.g., the drive for
globalization is modified so that common goals and objectives with
workable interfaces are targets.
To justify this recall that in the US we are still on the English system
of measurement rather that the metric system simply because a majority
of the populace considers metric measurement more difficult and a cheat.
One can purchase a set to tools for the the automobile in English or
Metric, and perhaps both. The various legislatures in the US have backed
off many efforts to drive one of the other.
H7 is a good effort. However, considerable time, effort and resources
can be wasted attempting to derive a common standard. As long as the
different systems interface well, why bother.
Our politicians are still attacking those countries, cultures, people,
etc that opposed the invasion of Iraq. Efforts to get the population to
accept 'French Fries' are still failing. Heard a business brief that
indicates that sales of these food items are still down from prior levels.
Charge ahead with the European approach and develop good interfaces.
-Thomas Clark
Gerard Freriks wrote:
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
> It is laudable that HHS obtained the rights for the use of
> SNOMED-CT in the USA.
> It is understandable that pressure will be used to deploy SNOMED
> as the preferred terminology.
> It is perfectly understandable that this pressure will result in
> the incorporation of SNOMED into HL7 v3.
>
> But...
>
> In Europe CEN/TC251 has declared to base its activities on HL7 v3
> RIM. And for several years we at CEN are co-operating in a very
> fruitful way with HL7 on the basis of a renewed Memorandum of
> Understanding.
> In Europe we have to take into account the requirements of several
> European countries.
> Not all countries have easy access tot SNOMED or have plans to
> obtain the rights to use SNOMED.
>
> Meaning, that HL7 must carefully investigate how and to what
> extend SNOMED-CT will become incorporated in HL7 v3.
>
> ('There is a need to bring into sync UMLS and HL7 at some level.
> To my mind Semantic Network and HL7 V3 RIM have to be reconciled.
> This will facilitate reuse in an object oriented way while
> retaining semantic validity. We can then have a true unified
> health information infrastructure.')
>
> This topic will be a good one to place on the next agenda when the
> board of HL7 and CEN/TC251 chairman and convenors will meet.
>
> With regards,
>
> Gerard Freriks
>
> --
> Gerard Freriks, MD
> Convenor CEN/TC251 WG1
>
> TNO-PG
> Zernikedreef 9
> Leiden
> The Netherlands
>
> +31 71 5181388
> +31 654 792800
>
>
> *From: *"Shah, Hemant" <HShah at coh.org>
> *Reply-To: *"Shah, Hemant" <HShah at coh.org>
> *Date: *Wed, 27 Aug 2003 09:53:45 -0700
> *To: *openehr-technical at openehr.org
> *Subject: *RE: Open Source EHR at the Americal Academy of Family
> Physicians ...
>
> The recent agreement between the Health and Human Services and the
> College of American Pathologists about integrating SNOMED into
> UMLS, and making it available for free to everyone in USA, was a
> landmark.
>
> Is there a thought process within HL7 that is exploring such
> opportunities? If HHS agrees to support HL7 to allow it to make
> its standards available for free, it will hasten its adoption and
> development while it serves the goals of the federal government too.
>
> There is a need to bring into sync UMLS and HL7 at some level. To
> my mind Semantic Network and HL7 V3 RIM have to be reconciled.
> This will facilitate reuse in an object oriented way while
> retaining semantic validity. We can then have a true unified
> health information infrastructure.
>
> Regards,
>
>
-
If you have any questions about using this list,
please send a message to d.lloyd at openehr.org
