I am not sure we can be certain that the structured data is definitely repeated or that one or other section is redundant I would tend to go with Gerard's suggestion of structured / unstructured and leave the issue of what to display to the consumer.
Ian Dr Ian McNicoll office / fax +44(0)141 560 4657 mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859 skype ianmcnicoll ian at mcmi.co.uk Clinical Analyst - Ocean Informatics ian.mcnicoll at oceaninformatics.com Consultant - IRIS GP Accounts ian at gpacc.co.uk Member of BCS Primary Health Care Specialist Group ? www.phcsg.org 2008/8/18 Gerard Freriks <gfrer at luna.nl>: > HI, > Am I wrong to observe that the differential is not Display and Non-Display, > but Structured and Non-Structured? > The problem with the suggestions by Sam is that part of the information that > is received is not visible. > In order to accept data from a third party I need to see and judge both the > visible and invisible parts of the Template. > Gerard > > -- <private> -- > Gerard Freriks, MD > Huigsloterdijk 378 > 2158 LR Buitenkaag > The Netherlands > T: +31 252544896 > M: +31 620347088 > E: gfrer at luna.nl > > Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary > Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. Benjamin Franklin 11 Nov 1755 > > > > > On 18, Aug, 2008, at 7:06 , Sam Heard wrote: > > Dear All (cross post) > > We are working in an environment where many applications and CDA messages > have information that is displayed as text and repeated information in > structured form. This also arises in applications which have a formatted > document plus structured information (typically in primary care). > > I am proposing that we have a section archetype to manage this. The > archetype display script would not display any information about the section > itself (it would be invisible) and would display the first subsection but > not the second. The section archetype would be: > > Differential display > > Display > > Entries here will display > > Non-display > > Entries here will not display > > This does mimic the CDA approach but does have the added benefit that the > displayed information can be structured as well (a requirement from our > customers who want to mix the textural content and structured medication > orders (ie not duplicate these in the textural display). > > If this archetype arrived somewhere where it was not known the generic > display script would show the non-display information (twice). This would be > unlikely to cause errors especially as there would be a heading Non-display. > > So that is the approach that we have considered. There is an alternative - > just have a non-display section. This has the advantage that it could be > added when required on an adhoc basis. The major problem that I can see is > that it would not be clear which part of the record held the information > that was redundant (ie where it was being displayed). > > I would be interested in people's views of this approach to the redundant > structured data problem that arises from CDA and word processor style record > applications. > > Cheers, Sam > > > Cheers, Sam > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at openehr.org > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical > >
