Comparing openEHR with SNOMED is plain wrong. Yes, part of the openEHR standard is an ontology of concepts, but this are high level concepts to model generic information structures, in the other hand SNOMED models fine grain concepts, with almost no structure. Certainly here is a place to collaboration since fine grain concepts could be use onside the generic model structures. So, here is no competition, is realy a good collaboration ground.
Cheers,Pablo. Secondly, a nonsensical statement about openEHR in the book... p.161OpenGALEN and OpenEHR are both attempts to promote open source ontology con-cepts. Both of the projects have been maturing but some view these as unnecessaryadditions or alternatives to SNOMED+UMLS. However, they are available under open source licensing terms might make them a better alternative to SNOMED for certainjurisdictions. 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 onthe 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. CheersMichael Osborne -- Michael Osborne _______________________________________________ openEHR-technical mailing list 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/20120213/344e2b7f/attachment.html>
