Thomas, that joke, let me elaborate on that. Sorry for the the lot of context
I know most EHR systems for GP's in the Netherlands. Lately I checked the most used EHR system, the latest version. It is designed by GP's They register according SOEP: Subjective (complaint), Objective (observations), Evaluation (mostly an ICPC) and Plan (medication, send to hospital, etc) The S is mostly free text. The O can be coded in SNOMED The E is ICPC but could as well be SNOMED The P is mostly also codable in SNOMED. An EHR for GP's in the Netherlands could have every contact registered having some lines of free text and some codes. It is almost SNOMED out of the box and some free text. And that is Dutch EHR software in 2018. So, it was a joke but very close to daily reality. Because of some circumstances I often see medical software, also see the internals, datamodels, etc. I wrote software for cardiologists for a few European programs, you'll find details on my LinkedIn site, I wrote a few own OpenEhr kernels because that are the working horses, in no time it is possible to adapt new data-requirements. I wrote it first on relational DB, the second one on XML DB, the third one on an own design of path-values in Postgress, the fourth one which was never finished on Oracle XML. I also wrote dozens of archetypes, they never asked me anything else then to register simple data, ECG's, heartrates, bloodpressures, skin humidity, temperature, everything could be coded. One project consisted of a heart-belt which did some extra observations, and my software was the data storage. So they could as well have taken another system instead of OpenEhr, but I was hired, and OpenEhr was what I did. I know that OpenEhr has metadata, context, and data in context of each other, that is what Ian called yesterday "The clinical question". The data can mostly be coded but the context cannot. This is where OpenEhr differs from the other EHR's. As I wrote before, OpenEhr and SNOMED are a strong team!!! But for many other products, my joke is very close to reality. My question to you Thomas, am I right or am I wrong? Best regards Bert Op 17 feb. 2018 20:22 schreef "A Verhees" <[email protected]>: > It was my own idea, I wrote they will not say that out loud. > > (It was a joke) > Bert > > Op za 17 feb. 2018 20:18 schreef Thomas Beale <[email protected]>: > >> >> >> On 16/02/2018 18:30, A Verhees wrote: >> > >> > But I have one remark about your point 4, about SNOMED. Just some >> > thinking. >> > >> > I think I understand the original purpose why it is designed. Encoding >> > every clinical term and arranging them in graphs, and also offer >> > translations. >> > >> > But they did not stop there, they defined a query language and a data >> > storage language, both capable of not only handling terms, but also >> > handling graph-based hierarchies and handling quantities. >> >> Bert, can you point to the specifications for this - I was unaware that >> SNOMED had re-invented the EHR... >> >> > >> > The purpose still can be to offer an international usable storage, but >> > why then the query language? I think they want to offer a base for an >> > EHR, but they don't say that loud, so they do not scare away vendors. >> > >> > But again, it does not keep me from my sleep, it is better for me to >> > concentrate on what is feasible now and have fun with that. >> > >> > Best regards >> > Bert >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> openEHR-technical mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr- >> technical_lists.openehr.org >> >
_______________________________________________ openEHR-technical mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
