Hi, We, at CEN are devoted to CEN/IEEE/ISO developments and not 'old rusty' standards.
Gerard -- -- Gerard Freriks, MD Convenor CEN/TC251 WG1 TNO-PG Zernikedreef 9 2333CK Leiden The Netherlands +31 71 5181388 +31 654 792800 On 29 Nov 2004, at 20:56, Damon Berry wrote: > Sam, > > Thanks for the helpful comments > > Sam Heard wrote: >> I believe that DSS >> groups will be a major player in determining the final archetypes >> that are >> agreed at a high level. >> > > It seems to me that in the same way, archetypes will have great impact > on > the development of future EHR-compatible instrument interface > standards. If > instruments and instrument interfaces are required to provide > information > that is complete enough to be integrated into the EHR, then additional > context information will need to be appended as the measurement values > are > recorded. > > Lets assume that a typical existing instrument interface was not > designed to > produce shareable EHR extracts - a safe bet in my view. Result: missing > context info. So to ensure compatibility either, > > - the instrument interface is revised by the instrument vendor to > satisfy > the associated archetypes > OR > - an adapter on the EHR side of the interface adds the required > context > information prior to submitting it to the EHR-S proper. (not very nice) > OR > - some compromise is reached on the completeness of the archetype. > (dangerous) > > OK - maybe I am exaggerating - but it would be interesting to pick a > "legacy" instrument standard (say crusty old ASTM 1394-91) and see how > it > holds up. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 1658 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20041129/e6c62e81/attachment.bin>
