Hi Daniel, thanks, I posted the idea also to some Dutch groups, one
argument was that there is no workflow in SNOMED.
It is not a perfect solution.
Therefore I am glad you mention the low hanging fruit, and maybe it is
more then "some", maybe it is a lot.
So let us concentrate on that, and see where we would be able to come.
* the use cases are not the same - ontologies represent universal
truths about the world, archetypes represent record keeping requirements
I understand your argument, but is that universal true? aren't there any
structures usable for recording in SNOMED. I am not a clinician. So, I
always have the wrong examples.
I checked "fever" in the SNOMED browser.
There are many subtypes, Malarial fever, Hay fever, Q fever, etc....
But there is also the primitive attribute Body Temperature (observable
entity) which can contain to a value. So that can be used for recording,
can't it?
* ontologies and archetypes have different "reasoning" requirements
and thus different representation languages, algorithms etc. (the
ontology-information model separation is a divide-and-conquer approach)
There are a lot of similarities, supertypes, subtypes, attributes, I
haven't found until now a structure which does not fit in an archetype.
I think, I must be missing something.
* for ontologies to compute meaningfully, a larger degree of
consistency is needed, archetypes may be (and are being) developed and
used with such a need
I am not sure I understand what you want to express here. Can you
explain it, maybe with an example.
Thanks
Bert
_______________________________________________
openEHR-technical mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
