Just for info the only current example of a CKM archetype which uses ITEM_TABLE is
Tendon and Babinski reflexes http://www.openehr.org/knowledge/OKM.html#showArchetype_1013.1.256_1 and the Audiogram example in Thomas's link shows exactly why ITEM_TABLE in an archetype root is unhelpful, since it needs a number of other non-lateralised statements, such as Normal statements, clinical description, multimedia etc. Having the Findings cluster expressed as a table would make perfect sense, although it would also have to support layering of detail below that, which might make tabular representation difficult in all cases. Ian Dr Ian McNicoll office / fax? +44(0)1536 414994 mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859 skype ianmcnicoll ian.mcnicoll at oceaninformatics.com Clinical analyst,?Ocean Informatics openEHR Clinical Knowledge Editor www.openehr.org/knowledge Honorary Senior Research Associate, CHIME, UCL BCS Primary Health Care SG Group www.phcsg.org On 10 November 2010 17:04, Thomas Beale <thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com> wrote: > > Audiogram, reflexes and vision results are sometimes recorded and displayed > in two-column tables in clinical settings. There is an audiogram Observation > archetype on CKM at Audiogram result - this does not use a table structure, > instead it just models the result of one ear and then allows multiples of > that, tagged with 'side'. It would require the software to figure out how to > tabulate this (not too hard obviously, but the point is that the data > representation might be some other structure that is also logically a > two-column table, so the software either has to be aware of all such > possible structures, or else some kind of GUI directive like Erik suggested > needs to be used. openEHR doesn't have such a thing at present). > > - t > > On 10/11/2010 16:26, Seabury Tom (NHS Connecting for Health) wrote: > > I cannot claim to be an implementer of openEHR but I am still interested to > understand the proposed use of Tables. > > Can anyone point me to a place where this is already explained with > examples, the abstract discussion is a little hard to follow. > > > > My simple reading of this is that what are currently trees would instead be > expressed as a sparsely populated arrays ? is that the point? > > > > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at openehr.org > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical > >
