The main differences between ADL 14. and ADL 2:
* ADL 2 properly supports specialisation, i.e. inheritance
* In ADL 2, a template is just another ADL 2 archetype (with
'template' keyword)
* special syntax types for Quantity, Coded text and Ordinals are
replaced with a standard 'tuple' construct
* internal value sets are better represented
* proper versioning rules and identifiers
On 12/02/2017 15:30, Dileep V S wrote:
Hi,
Thank you all for the quick responses. We will try some of the other
tools mentioned in the replies and see if they will work for us.
Overall what I have gathered is as below (please correct if I am wrong)
1. It will be better to stick to ADL 1.4 OPT for some more time
it depends on what you want to use the OPT for. The ADL 2 OPT has a
draft specification, and the ADL Workbench generates it as it is defined
today. It is more powerful and consistent than the ADL 1.4 OPT.
1. documentation on oet is not widely distributed as it is a
proprietary format. So manual coding with oet may not work
well, .oet is a trivial XML structure, and there is an XSD for it. There
is however no other documentation. It's not proprietary in any sense
other than being the format of the Ocean Template Designer tool.
1. An open source ADL 2.0 modelling tool is expected to be released
soon (Any schedule of when it is expected?).
it already exists, but is being upgraded - its called adl-designer
<https://github.com/openEHR/adl-designer>.
1. Till the new tool comes out, the options are to use ocean &
LinkEHR tools
I would suggest determining your intended workflow first. You may start
with existing ADL 1.4 archetypes. Both the ADL Workbench and
adl-designer will convert these to ADL2 archetypes.
1. ADL 1.4 can be converted to ADL 2.0 easily. I assume this is using
the ADL workbench. Not sure what happens after that as we still do
not have tools to create 2.0 templates and export them to ADL 1.4
opt.
adl-designer will create an ADL 2 template, but I am not sure if it has
all facilities as of today.
We work with EHRC (http://ehrc.iiitb.ac.in/work.html) as a technical
partner in their public health initiatives. Access to health in rural
India still faces many challenges. Indian govt. plans to cover 60% of
the population (mostly rural and less resourceful) in the public
health programs, which given the enormity of the work, will only be
possible with highly innovative approaches leveraging technology.
We believe that information should be the backbone of any large scale
innovation in healthcare delivery in India and are working on defining
some common models that can be deployed widely across a large country
like India. Standards in EHR are very nascent in India and a lot of
work needs to be done in this area.
At this point we are in the process of modelling some simple use cases
to build capability to do more serious stuff as things evolve. One
question that we are trying to answer is whether we should use OpenEHR
approach for demographics or use traditional modelling, since the
demographic data model is fairly stable. Some idea of how others have
done this before will help us as shorten our learning curve.
there are demographic models visible in CKM, which may be of help,
mostly based on ISO 22220 which may be helpful
- thomas
_______________________________________________
openEHR-technical mailing list
openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
