Mattias Forss wrote: > > > > > Yes, I knew that. There seems to be some options when archetypes need > to reference the same kind of information to be entered in an EHR, e.g > . slots, specialisations, etc. Some EHR data should probably be > limited to be created in only one archetype if it's concerning the > same finding context in a domain. In addition, if data spreads over > several areas of findings, single nodes from archetypes should > probably not be reused and instead they should exist in several > archetypes since finding procedures may change in certain domains and > make the originally referenced nodes incompatible. this is our experience so far, and we have to learn (as technical people) to really trust the experience of clinical people, not think we know too much about real archetypes. The vision of archetypes is really about empowering domain users, and sometimes it can feel odd to be told we engineers don't quite know what we are talking about. I see it as a sign of a successful future for information systems development.
- thomas _______________________________________________ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
