On 09/11/2010 05:54, Williamtfgoossen at cs.com wrote: > They (the clinical models in HL7 v3 R-MIM format) are all part of > extensive clinician input and review, sorry clinicians do understand > the modeling in HL7 space, but indeed like any other modeling effort, > need some education first. > Statements that this HL7 clinical content modeling is done without > clinicians input is simply a lie. > Comments that clinicians are unable to read and understand and > critique UML and/or HL7 RIM based class models is not consistent with > my 8 year + experience with a dozen of national projects in the > Netherlands. > > > * > *
William, I don't think anyone said there were no clinical people involved in HL7v3 modelling. However it is certainly a widely available experience all over the world that many clinicians engaged in content modelling for some programme or standards reason find it difficult to use UML. This is not because of UML being difficult per se (although most people who claim to understand it do not have any understanding of the downstream consequences of modelling choices made in the diagrams), but because a) UML is mal-adapted to what they want to express (using a class language to express an object constraint structure is annoying) and b) they tend mostly to think in terms of screens, their normal visualisation of the data and/or workflow. Nevertheless, there are undoubtedly some clinicians who can understand some UML diagrams. This is not evidence that all clinicians working in this area can author the correct UML diagrams (even assuming that to be possible). RIM-based models are famously incomprehensible to people from all walks of life. Again, there are some people (including some clinicians) who understand them, and can author them, but they are a) not very intuitive and b) highly complex, for realistic examples. Due to the lack of basic data structures, e.g. the example of History/Events structure used in openEHR, such structures are avoided, or have to be manually created from Act / ActRelationship networks. The huge number of attribute nodes and code values also causes complications; I once calculated the value space of a single Act node with its 22 attributes to be 810 billion points. You can guess that the possible value space of a realistic RMIM is astronomical. This makes building models difficult. The traffic on the HL7 MnM list indicates the massive ongoing confusion around these models for a decade. If you don't believe me, try searching your archive simply for posts relating to 'context conduction'. If this modelling method were easy, everyone would be using it. - thomas -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20101109/769676a8/attachment.html>
