On 16/02/2018 09:23, Bert Verhees wrote:
I think it means, predictable paths, so data can be found by queries
without even knowing exact what one is looking for. For example, the
eye-colour example for a pregnant woman as Thomas gave. I changed it
to iris, because iris is not often registered, but there are
clinicians which think it is important. A vendor could create an
iris-analyzing device, and hand over an archetype with it to read out
the data. That is what we wish for for OpenEhr, isn't it?
It ain't going to happen tomorrow, but it could happen in the future.
no reason it cannot happen now..
So when querying the particularities of a pregnancy an eventually
irisscopy must be part of the result-set, even when no-one asked for
it. So the vendor I just mentioned should have has archetype modeled
in a way that it fits in the querying structure. This is a technical
issue, deciding if an iris is interesting is a clinical issue, but
storing an irisscopy in a way that it can/will be found, even when it
is not expected is a technical issue.
There must be a pattern imposed on the archetype structures which
causes that data can be found, and never become invisible.
you will just use a generic eye/iris archetype for the iris data points;
it will be mixed in to a template with pregnancy specific data if it is
needed. And it will be reliably queryable via the paths in the generic
eye/iris archetype.
It is not that I want make technicians to important, it is not my call
anyway. I am glad that clinicians can do most of the jobs, but to
optimize the implementable aspect of archetypes, we need technicians,
I hope that this example makes this clear. And it is not the only
example, there are other examples which to find ask for other structures.
- thomas
_______________________________________________
openEHR-technical mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
