Dear all, Here in Amsterdam we are working on expressing archetypes as OWL graphs, and actually I think that it would be ideal to host them under the openEHR domain in future.
We transform archetypes from ADL to OWL, with the work of Catalina Costa from Medical University of Graz (previously in Universidad de Murcia) and Leonardo Lezcano from the Universidad de Alcal? as a starting point. Please consult our paper [1] that has been accepted for the KR4HC workshop for details. It is not yet camera ready, but it gives an overview of some advantages of representing archetypes in OWL. Currently Alberto Maldonado from IBIME, Technical University of Valencia, is doing a research visit in our group. He is working on generating OWL data (individuals) that are compliant with the OWL representation of archetypes from both legacy XML data and archetype compliant XML EHR extracts. The idea is to have normalized clinical data expressed in OWL in order to ease its reuse in clinical research (mainly clinical trials) and quality measurement. Best regards, Kathrin Dentler [1] http://www.few.vu.nl/~kdr250/prohealth12kr4hc_archetypes_owl.pdf Op 03-07-12 10:19, Ian McNicoll schreef: > There is quite a bit of interest in the UK in adapting the US-based > SMART platform www.smartplatforms.org for UK use. One aspect of SMART > involves the definition of a fairly simple API which serves RDF graphs > of archetype like objects e.g Blood pressure, allergy. The SMART guys > are aware of openEHR and have been quite support of it in the CIMI > work, and I understand that they do not see the clinical content > definitions underpinning the APIs as core business. > > It seems to me that there is an interesting possibility of using > openEHR archetypes (probably templated) to define the clinical content > which is to be expressed as RDF graphs. This will give a much more > adaptable and extensible approach + better model governance etc. > > It seems to me that the key requirement is to be able to create a > run-time artefact, in the same way that we create Template data schema > but to output RDF rather than XSD. Is this correct and if so, does > anyone have any experience with this? > > The other interesting aspect is that because the SMART API returns > mostly ENTRY-level components, these need to be wrapped in some > COMPOSITION level metadata. Does it make sense that we actually return > very lean EHR Extracts? > > Ian > -- Kathrin Dentler AI Department | Department of Medical Informatics Faculty of Sciences | Academic Medical Center Vrije Universiteit | Universiteit van Amsterdam k.dentler at vu.nl | k.dentler at amc.uva.nl http://www.few.vu.nl/~kdr250/
