Dr LONJON Roger wrote: >hello philippe and thomas, >excuse me to intervene, in English of bad quality. >in medicine for me, a result must be validated and must be signed by the >producer. This result is therefore automatically a total confidence level. It >is a very important notion on the legal plan when these results are put to >disposition on a shared medical file (server web) > >Inversely if this result is approximate, with a coefficient of mistake >importing, it is not about a validated data and therefore publishable, because >consequences in r?ponsabilit? for their author are unforeseeable if the patient >carries complaint. > >I am unaware of this aspect of the problem so enters in your reflection. > > It is actually quite common: consider that in a differential diagnosis, confidences are always expressed in each of the possible diagnosesa, e.g. 90%, 9%, 1% for possible reasons for a child's fever. I don't see it as being about mistakes, it's about the estimation by a clinical professional of the probability of correctness of an opinion. In openEHR, confidences always appear in data of the EVALUATION type. There is no question of clinician confidence in OBSERVATIONs - they are for all intents objective. Of course, machines may have limited accuracy (inbuilt error) and numeric results may be reported with limited precision; these situations can be archetyped.
- thomas >Cordially > >Dr R LONJON >france > > - If you have any questions about using this list, please send a message to d.lloyd at openehr.org
