Hi all, A few belated comments on Booleans. In my experience there are a few genuine booleans in clinical data e.g. "Is the prostate specimen present Y/N" in the context of histopath . Well it either is or it ain't. Not much use for null flavours or 'yes ... but' , but in most circumstances the Yes/No construct is essentially a mangled clinical statement with all the ifs, buts and maybes that implies.
"Is the urine blood-stained-> Yes is equivalent to "Urine bloodstained" and . "Is the urine blood-stained-> No is equivalent to "Urine not bloodstained". It is now my standard practice in virtually all cases to model these clinical booleans as term lists, generally ensuring that the key semantics are carried in the value i.e "Urine blood-stained" , rather than just "Yes" but this definitely annoys developers who without clinical understanding can find it difficult to know how to map the terms to the checkbox or radio-button boolean paradigm in their requirements documents. It is easy to dismiss this as just 'a GUI / presentational issue' but I think that the clinical questionnaire pattern is actually a legitimate if unsupported kind of clinical recording which has been largely overlooed by informatics, and should be acknowleged and supported in openEHR., even if the key undelying paradigm (as for HL7 and SNOMED) is the clinical statement. So one immediate requirement is for a DV_BOOLEAN to allow term-bindings (including internal atCoded terms to the possible values but I think there is whole world of interesting PhDs to be done on the subject!! On 19 March 2012 12:40, Grahame Grieve <grahame at healthintersections.com.au>wrote: > Hey Sam > > it's a good day when you can upset both Tom and I equally in a single > paragraph. > > Grahame > > > On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Sam Heard <sam.heard at oceaninformatics.com > > wrote: > >> Sorry about the Eiffel slur J**** >> >> Cheers, Sam**** >> >> ** ** >> >> *From:* openehr-technical-bounces at lists.openehr.org [mailto: >> openehr-technical-bounces at lists.openehr.org] *On Behalf Of *Thomas Beale >> *Sent:* Monday, 19 March 2012 8:18 AM >> *To:* openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org >> >> *Subject:* Re: openEHR / FHIR data types cross analysis**** >> >> ** ** >> >> >> Actually, Eiffel has nothing to do with it (I wrote my own date/time >> libraries based on ISO 8601 semantics). What I am influenced by is what I >> see in CKM and other repositories. >> >> openEHR CKM >> >> >> >> NEHTA CKM >> >> >> On 18/03/2012 21:00, Sam Heard wrote: **** >> >> Hi**** >> >> ** ** >> >> This is an interesting discussion. It seems that we might have hit the >> issue**** >> >> of defining data types independent of a reference model. In a reference**** >> >> model we do want to know that there are a limited set of types (formally**** >> >> expressed) that can be used at any point.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> I was influenced by the discussion at CIMI that demonstrated this.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> So the sort of textural elements you have within the datatypes that allow**** >> >> someone to say Autumn for datetime (HumanDate) are probably best dealt >> with**** >> >> in models where that is appropriate and with a suitable set of**** >> >> terminologies.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> An uncertain datetime is better for processing than a text (soon after my**** >> >> mother died). There is no doubt about the usefulness of the text, just >> that**** >> >> it does not belong in a date field.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> The FHIR may be suitable for messages at this point in time, if so, it is**** >> >> easy to port information to this.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Let's keep this thread alive and get a little broader input. Thomas is**** >> >> influenced by Eiffel, Grahame by XML. Most developers will probably sit**** >> >> somewhere in between in terms of requirements for rigor.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Cheers, Sam**** >> >> * * >> >> * * >> >> ** ** >> >> ** ** >> >> ** ** >> >> ** ** >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> openEHR-technical mailing list >> openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org >> >> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org >> > > > > -- > ----- > http://www.healthintersections.com.au / grahame at > healthintersections.com.au/ +61 > 411 867 065 > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org > > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org > -- Dr Ian McNicoll office +44 (0)1536 414 994 fax +44 (0)1536 516317 mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859 skype ianmcnicoll ian.mcnicoll at oceaninformatics.com *Primary Health Info 23 ? 25th April in Warwick ? are you coming?<http://www.primaryhealthinfo.org/> * Clinical Modelling Consultant, Ocean Informatics, UK Director openEHR Foundation www.openehr.org/knowledge Honorary Senior Research Associate, CHIME, UCL SCIMP Working Group, NHS Scotland BCS Primary Health Care www.phcsg.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20120327/7ab9cf0d/attachment-0001.html>
