On 13/11/2014 20:34, Bakke, Silje Ljosland wrote:
> The original context for this discussion was this archetype:
> http://arketyper.no/ckm/#showArchetype_1078.36.25 (default archetype language
> for this CKM is Norwegian, but it can be changed manually)
>
> Being an all-metric country since the 1800s, we've removed lbs as a possible
> unit, but added g (gram) for weighing infants.
>
There is something I have been thinking about for a while, which is
whether we need some kind of 'profiles' in archetypes, that can be used
select or deselect alternative constraints. An 'alternative' in an
archetype is technically
1. an alternative object constraint under a single-valued attribute;
example: a DV_QUANTITY and a DV_COUNT as siblings under
ELEMENT.value representing 'amount of tobacco'
2. any optional object under a container attribute, typically with
other siblings
3. any branch of a tuple (ADL 2 speak) or branch of C_DV_QUANTITY -
this is the units example
So I have been thinking whether we need something like a profile
section, with named profiles, pointing to the paths of things in (or not
in) that profile. We could imagine profiles like:
profiles = <
["metric"] = <path1, path2, ....>
["system international"] = <path1, path2, ....>
["british imperial"] = <...>
["us imperial"] = <...>
>
Now the question is whether this just applies to units, or whether it's
more global. For example, could there be an argument to create profiles
for 'general practice', 'icu', 'aged care'? Consider the example of the
BP archetype. It contains 'systolic pressure', 'diastolic pressure',
'pulse pressure' and 'mean arterial pressure'. Now the last two are only
used in anaesthesiology and specific instruments (from memory); one
could imagine some profiles that would select out pulse pressure for
just 'anaesthesiology'.
Right now, this selection occurs by people specialising archetypes, and
ultimately making templates, and along they way, getting rid of things
they don't want, and keeping what they do. But there's no way you can
run a query over an archetype library and filter it on some specialty,
or even 'metric'.
But there are many other reasons for specialising and removing / keeping
elements as well - geographical, legislative, anything...
So for now this remains just an idea - we would need some input from
clinical modellers to know whether it's a useful one or not.
- thomas
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20141113/62c53624/attachment.html>
