Bigpond wrote: >Not necessarily - it is the 'stuff' that surrounds information that gives >meaning. Reduce too far and information loses its context and is at risk of >being meaningless information - a blood pressure of 120/80 is meaningless >unless context is supplied? Ape, human, earthworm about to explode! > > This is one of the reasons openEHR has a well-defined model for the OBSERVATION subtype of ENTRY: you don't just record the data, you record the 'state' (of the organism), and also of course which organism (self, foetus, donor person), along with other information.
>To portray a human in digital form will require massively increased metadata >and context to relay what might have taken a 2 second glance from an >experienced clinician eg jaundice, death, fractured hip. > > well, not massively increased - in fact it is not that much, it is just very carefully designed. - thomas beale - If you have any questions about using this list, please send a message to d.lloyd at openehr.org
