Heather,
You are correct.
Do not mix things.
Tools become to complex.
And healthcare providers loose focus.
When designing archetypes we see the archetype screen.
When designing and discussing templates we see the template screen.
But when discussing data entry and data presentation screens we see
them.
For each its own tooling and ways to present.
Thinking about the presentation aspect:
- There are several levels:
- parts of the data/information that display urgent matters that have
to be signaled and that this fact needs to be documented.
- local arrangements that deal with conditional context dependent
presentation, the functionality of a electronic form
- local arrangements that deal with local preferences on location on
the screen, presentation forms, fonts, colors, etc.
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 Jun 27, 2008, at 2:40 PM, Heather Leslie wrote:
> Hi all,
>
>> From where I sit the issue being discussed here is an old one
>> essentially
> about human nature - we all respond most easily to that which we
> know and
> understand.
>
> In designing a website we know that if you want input about
> navigation, then
> don't have any meaningful content or GUI hints available or almost
> certainly
> all the feedback will be about the size or color of the button and
> the font
> and position of the heading.
>
> Similarly my concern in designing templates and getting the content
> reviewed
> appropriately is that as soon as you add interface/GUI features to
> make it
> more 'intuitive' to the clinicians their focus goes immediately to
> that
> which is more familiar. That is, the feedback tends to be related
> to their
> user interface experience (naturally gained from their day-to-day
> use of
> their current clinical system) rather than actually critiquing which
> archetypes have been used, which data fields are presented, and all
> their
> associated attributes, cardinality, constraints and related metadata
> etc
> etc.
>
> So my preferred response (and from positive experience) is to spend a
> relatively small amount of time to educate the clinicians on how to
> feedback
> appropriately and meaningfully on the pure archetypes and templates
> - we
> have done this successfully, but I suggest it is probably optimal if a
> clinician involved in the design (perhaps a health informatician
> with a leg
> in 'both camps') to walk them thru the models and to make it a
> sensible
> conversation. It is my opinion that the GUI design and review
> should be
> completely separate to the content design and review - mixing the
> two gets
> very confusing.
>
> Regards
>
> Heather
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20080627/02f94708/attachment.html>
