On 23/03/2011 11:41, Bert Verhees wrote:
> The idea is to implement guideline/rules etc in Archetypes.
> In this way you can force software to look at some conditions if some
> other conditions are met.
>
> As I gave an example: If bloodpressure> value -->> also look at heartbeat.
this kind of thing is a (simple) clinical guideline, and needs its own
representation. For one thing, BP and heart rate are in two different
archetypes; neither is a sensible place to put the map of value ranges
indicating normal / danger etc. This is the job of guideline languages
and systems, on which decision support tools are based. Various reasons
for this:
* consider that today's understanding of the BP/HR interaction leads
to a condition of if BP/systolic > 140, next year, better science
might tell us that in fact the right value for this purpose is
160. We don't want that value buried in archetypes.
* the above formula, is a condition + action, and actions may
require their own formalisms. They could be done using archetypes
actually, based on a reference model of 'action primitives', but
they would still be completely distinct from the health data
archetypes we use today.
- thomas
> Bert
>
*
*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20110323/11b40169/attachment.html>
