A good question. My opinion is that it will be around for a long time. As NLM becomes more in use, there seems to be a tendency to believe that narrative will be around for a long time. I think what you propose will be an interesting discussion. The problem with narrative is that its contents, organization, completeness, and use of non-standard abbreviations is totally uncontrolled.
From: openEHR-technical [mailto:openehr-technical-boun...@lists.openehr.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Beale Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2013 1:29 PM To: openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org Subject: Re: Instruction archetypes and overlaping nodes with INSTRUCTION.narrative On 29/10/2013 16:28, Dr Ed Hammond, Ph.D. wrote: As a point of interest, the "required" narrative section in CCD was an interim step because we (US) still have a number of sites that cannot accommodate structured data. In my opinion it does not imply correctness. Ed, I suggested some rules in my blog post for deal with this very ubiquitous reality... I wonder if you have any feel for whether the text/structured 'equivalence' idea will remain in a future CDA - going by Grahame's blog<http://www.healthintersections.com.au/?p=1699>, it appears CDA will turn into FHIR, i.e. a completely different format? If it is retained, there is an opportunity to establish better rules for this. I can imagine upgrading openEHR to use such rules as well. - thomas -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20131029/db06b574/attachment.html>
