Dear All, I started this thread to get some feedback for finding methods/metrics to test & validate maintainability and interoperability (of Archetype based two-level apps). And I got very nice ones; however for interoperability, apart from Gerard's interface numbers I did not get any and interestingly from a quick literature survey I got very little. I mean there are some indirect approaches but not straightforward. My case is a little more easier:
1) There is an up and running clinical IS developed with single level methodology based on an internationally agreed terminology including relationships and structure (domain knowledge let's say) 2) There is a complete Archetype model of this terminology using openEHR RM which can comfortably be considered as a domain ontology (it has more than what is given in terminology; i.e. existences, cardinalities) 3) These two can be said to have the same domain knowledge; ie. one hardcoded and one two-level modelled. Now can you think about a method to evaluate the interoperability levels/score of two systems? Do we need a remote system for benchmarking (i.e. connect and see how they interoperate)? Sorry to bother....but if we can get this straight perhaps we can express comfortably that a two-level app beats a single level app 7x in maintainability and 5x interoperability. Or beats 2x HL7 system in maintenance but is beaten 2x in interoperablity. Perhaps I am being too naive but it is worth trying. Koray Atalag wrote: > Hi, > > I want to learn how we can formally/objectively prove that Archetype > based dual level development formalism alleviates problems of > interoperability and maintainability. I was wondering if someone did or > know of any such study which applies formal validation methods? > > Best regards, > > Koray Atalag, MD, Ph.D. > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at openehr.org > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical > >
