For the most part, I find that people who write negative remarks most often know little about the subject. I for one have never viewed openEHR as controversial. I think openEHR is competitive as is HL7, IHE and most other organizations. Some of the competition is based on our belief that we are right; some on protection of our history and proprietary interests. Actually, much of our life is based on competition, and I don't think it is a bad thing. Pot-shots and misstatements like in this book are actually a sign of success for openEHR. Don't sweat it.
W. Ed Hammond Director, Duke Center for Health Informatics 2424 Erwin Rd, 12th Floor, Room 12053 Phone: 919.668.2408 Fax: 919.668.7868 Assistant: Naomi Pratt Email: naomi.pratt at duke.edu<mailto:naomi.pratt at duke.edu> Phone: 919.668.8753 From: openehr-technical-bounces at openehr.org [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Thomas Beale Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2012 8:01 AM To: openehr-technical at openehr.org Subject: Re: Meaningful Use and Beyond - O'Reilly press - errata It would be interesting to see what US-based list members think of what Michael has quoted below. Is openEHR really seen as 'controversial' in the US? (Controversy can be good - at least it means debate). The quote below about David Uhlman being CTO of openEHR in 2001 is certainly incorrect - I imagine it is supposed to read 'OpenEMR', going by what I see here<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ClearHealth> in Wikipedia (in any case, openEHR has never had a 'CTO' position). That's a surprisingly bad fault in O'Reilly editing; worse, the author page for David Uhlman<http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/au/4766> on the O'Reilly website repeats the same error. This review<http://shop.oreilly.com/product/0636920020110.do#PowerReview> on the same website seems to confirm a complete lack of review or editing of the original manuscript. O'Reilly obviously is missing basic mechanisms for quality control. But the more interesting question is: are the opinions in this book about openEHR representative of a US view? - thomas On 12/02/2012 11:22, Michael Osborne wrote: I read the recently released O'Reilly book "Meaningful Use and Beyond" on Safari books today and found the following errors and some quite blatantly false statements about OpenEHR. Firstly is the claim by one of the authors, David Uhlman, that he was CTO of openEHR in 2001 - a claim which Thomas Beale denies. David Uhlman is CEO of ClearHealth, Inc., which created and supports ClearHealth, the first and only open source, meaningful use-certified, comprehensive, ambulatory EHR.... David entered health-care in 2001 as CTO for the OpenEHR project. One of the first companies to try commercializing open source healthcare systems , OpenEHR met face first with the difficult realities of bringing proven mainstream technologies into the complicated and some- times nonsensical world of healthcare. Secondly, a nonsensical statement about openEHR in the book... p.161 OpenGALEN and OpenEHR are both attempts to promote open source ontology con- cepts. Both of the projects have been maturing but some view these as unnecessary additions or alternatives to SNOMED+UMLS. However, they are available under open source licensing terms might make them a better alternative to SNOMED for certain jurisdictions. And this, p163... OpenEHR is a controversial approach to applying knowledge engineering principles to the entire EHR, including things like the user interfaces. You might think of Open- EHR as an ontology for EHR software design. Many health informaticists disagree on the usefulness of OpenEHR. Some believe that HL7 RIM, given its comprehensive nature, is the highest level to which formal clinical knowledge managing needs to go. I'm beginning to lose all respect for O'Reilly press. It's been all downhill since the camel book. Cheers Michael Osborne -- Michael Osborne _______________________________________________ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org<mailto:openEHR-technical at openehr.org> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20120213/7ae6d954/attachment.html>
