Gerard Freriks wrote: > > > I use this e-mail to promote other (we feel) important standards that > we -at CEN/tc251- are working on. > It is the Health Information Systems Architecture European standard. > (HISA) > It describes functions/services around the EHR that constitute a > functioning EHR system. > Requirements based, the Enterprise viewpoint, the Informational > Viewpoint and the Computational viewpoint will be described. > The behavior and the interfaces of these services will be the content > of this standard. > An other standard we are working on is Concepts for Continuity of > Care. (CONTSYS) In this standard all the concepts are modeled that are > needed for co-operation between healthcare providers. Among other > things it models care plans, protocols, patient mandates, etc. > > Both HISA and CONTSYS will play a role in the EHRcom archetypes, as > will the GPICS. > > Bert. > Could you let us know how you feel now, having read this e-mail?
Sorry Gerard, for responding so late, I am so busy. Looks promising to me, on one hand, I continue developing GPICs as much as is needed and asked for. On the other hand, I will try to find funding for creating a live-query-set which can deliver data to archetype editors, and maybe it will be possible to support some ADL-scripts. I know, archetypes can be programmed hard-coded, but that has not much of a challenge to me. We'll see, anyway there are people wanting GPICs, let me serve them first Regards Bert Verhees > > Gerard Freriks > = > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -- > > -- > > Gerard Freriks, MD > > Convenor CEN/TC251 WG1 > > > TNO Quality of Life > > Wassenaarseweg 56 > > Leiden > > > PostBox 2215 > > 22301CE Leiden > > The Netherlands > > > +31 71 5181388 > > +31 654 792800 > > > On 17-jul-2005, at 21:43, Bert Verhees (ROSA Software) wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Thomas Beale asked me to write more to this mailinglist, and I have >> an important issue to discuss. >> >> Last thursday, I had a meeting wherein Thomas was present, in fact, >> it was education about EN13606. After a whole day of talking, by >> Thomas, he really did a good job. I noticed there was no mention >> about GPICs, and I asked Thomas, how GPICs fitted in his story. He >> said to my surprise, that they didn't. GPICs were in fact, obsoleet. >> But one could still use them to migrate data to an archetype-ready >> data layer. >> >> I was shocked, how is it possible that in silence a 400 pages part of >> a standard can be declared obsoleet. One throws away many many years >> of expensive work. Not only the standardisation comitee which must >> have worked for years on this, but also work from early adapters like me. >> >> I understand that it is better to change half way than to proceed in >> error. But if such an important change takes place, one will want to >> know how it is possible that such an erroneous large part (400 pages, >> 200 classes) of the standard can exist for so many years, and does >> not get critized publically. Something serious must be wrong somewhere. >> >> What also seems very strange to me, I discussed a GPIC >> SubjectOfInvestigation with Edward Glueck and Tom Marley on 25 may >> 2005, I discussed GPICs with Gerard Freriks on 4 jun 2005. No mention >> about the fact that GPICs are obsoleet, or will be obsoleet in a few >> weeks from then. >> >> Then on 14 july 2005 I hear that GPICs do not play a role in the >> EN13606 standard. >> >> Really, I am completely flabbergasted. >> And not only me, I guess, but also the organisations which paid my >> expenses for quite some time. >> >> I wonder if there are some opinions about this subject. >> >> Kind regards >> Bert Verhees >> >> - >> If you have any questions about using this list, >> please send a message to d.lloyd at openehr.org <mailto:d.lloyd at >> openehr.org> >> > > = - If you have any questions about using this list, please send a message to d.lloyd at openehr.org
