Hi! In addition to deciding on archetypes to use, I believe circulating a couple of complete instance examples fairly soon (this week?) would be very helpful in detecting differences in specification interpretations. Having more than one archetype editor certainly helped detect differences and ambiguities in other parts of the specification earlier.
Things to include in the instance examples: - EHR instance data constructed using comoposition archetypes with a couple of nested entry archetypes - Several versions within a versionied composition, both IMPORTED _VERSIONs and ORIGINAL_VERSIONs - Several "creating systems" producing version branches (and possibly a merge). - Realistic demographic content including some example clinicians, organisations and patients. - Use of the "participations" attribute of EVENT_CONTEXT (- Possibly also folders) The examples do not right now need to use exactly the optimal archetype set intended for the connectathon, we'll probably raise many important implementation issues & discussions anyway. Question: Is CONTRIBUTION information never sent explicitly between systems, but only backward-referenced via AUDIT_DETAILS via the "composer" attribute of COMPOSITION? Best regards, Erik Sundvall erisu at imt.liu.se http://www.imt.liu.se/~erisu/ Tel: +46-13-227579 On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 20:51, Tony Shannon<tony.shannon at nhs.net> wrote: > Thanks Tim, > > Thats useful. > Some other feedback from clinical colleagues would be useful on this. > Certainly the high level use cases you posted , ie Newborn and then 65yo > with Chronic Diseases should be useful. > The detailed candidate content posted up about these 2 I'm not so > concerned about directly replicating.. if we can tackle the archetypes > needed to do SOAP and Summary noting these can form the basis of the > material needed to support both journeys. > > The top 10 Emergency Archetype work Heather is currently over seeing > will begin that. Not sure what timetable is realistic for broadening out > ?CKM input to cover the other material needed for SOAP, but Im sure it > will be months rather than weeks. > > It may be that a few of us produce ?a candidate subset of archetypes > that can handle both SOAP and Summary for the Connectathon purposes > ahead of any ARB/CRB checks, given the time pressures you were > suggesting earlier. Dec 1 gives us about 12 weeks I guess. > My sense is there must be value in agreeing a small set of very basic > set of ?archetypes over the next weeks for these purposes if that helps > move forward the Connectathon.. > Others may have a view on that? > #Heather do you want to comment on this thanks.. > > > Perhaps other can comment on the date time and technical issues for the > connectathon. > > I've updated the wiki as we will be aiming to use Opereffa within the > Connectathon, Serefs time will likely be constrained but thankfully he > is certainly willing to try... > > Regards, > > Tony > > > Tim Cook wrote: >> Hi Tony, >> >> I have added two potential use cases >> http://www.openehr.org/wiki/display/resources/Connect-a-thon+Details >> >> now I need clinicians to tell the rest of us is this a doable situation. >> Can we do these two with the 15-20 archetypes that were discussed below? >> >> If not, what needs to change? >> >> I also need feedback on the other items on that page. >> >> Also, please start making commitments to participate. >> http://www.openehr.org/wiki/display/resources/Connect-a-thon >> +Participants >> >> If we do not have systems signed up and committed to participate then we >> are wasting our time in planning the event. >> >> Cheers, >> Tim >> >> >> >> On Fri, 2009-08-21 at 10:22 +0100, Tony Shannon wrote: >>> Thanks Tim, >>> >>> In reply.. >>> I am a believer in keeping things simple where possible. >>> My sense is that we can demostrate an impressive solution if we offer >>> support around a single/few patient journey(s) and a limited set of >>> archetypes. >>> >>> Let me play devils advocate and suggest all we need to address for the >>> majority of this is just 2 overlapping groups of archetypes. >>> 1) The Emergency Summary set (Top10) that Heather has been polling for >>> 2) The SOAP note set >>> Note that these have significant overlap. >>> >>> That journey could begin in any/many ways.. >>> eg >>> 1) >>> Newborn .. with a SOAP note >>>> http://74.125.77.132/search?q=cache:YO6tdfa2xXgJ:faculty.washington.edu/alexbert/MEDEX/Spring/MCHNewBornsoapnote.doc+soap+note+newborns&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk >>> Home with a Summary note >>> 2) >>> To the Primary Care doc.. with a new SOAP note >>> At end of visit.. an updated Summary >>> 3) >>> To the ED/other Unit.. where we access the Summary >>> Then we add a new SOAP note >>> Then we update the Summary >>> 4)..into old age.. >>> When a Long Term condition requires more SOAP notes >>> and updates to the Summary >>> and so on and so on.. >>> OK a very simplistic example, but I hope it illustrates a point. >>> If some think that its too broad then we could use a subset of that >>> journey..again only needing with SOAP and Summary. >>> >>> >>> The top 10 Summary drive has already begin the process of now starting >>> to explore ?15/20 key archetypes, all of which selected can and will >>> provide the basis for the SOAP note too. >>> >>> One point your question does raise is whether we are aiming for >>> archetypes that have more breadth or depth, or a mix in between. >>> I would be looking for the Medinfo demo set to provide *just enough* >>> (and no more than that) detail to get the demo across. >>> >>> I would not expect us to have finalised the definitive archetypes for >>> Summary/SOAP by then. There will be never be "final" versions of any of >>> these anwway..always works in progress. >>> >>> Hope these ideas help.. >>> >>> Tony >>> >>> Tim Cook wrote: >>>> On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 17:46 +0100, Tony Shannon wrote: >>>>> Thanks Tim & co for moving on this. >>>>> >>>>> Tim >>>>> You kindly offered to help organise this, please let me know if I can >>>>> help in any way. >>>> Tony, >>>> >>>> I think that you will be key in leading the charge to be sure that we >>>> have the correct archetypes in place. ?Maybe even if they haven't all >>>> passed review by then???? >>>> >>>> We at least need to have a MedInfo2010 Set defined. Probably no later >>>> than 1 December. So we have the list prior to everyone going on the >>>> holiday break. ?This will provide time for the various application >>>> developers to do template building and testing. ?Maybe enough time for >>>> CKM/ARB certification as well? >>>> >>>> But of course this means that we also need to define the number of use >>>> cases and number of patients we will be demoing. >>>> >>>> Comments please........ >>>> >>>> --Tim
