Grahame,

What you state is plainly valid, and the "it exists" argument is not to
be considered lightly.

However, as an engineer and a developer, I always try to measure the
payload of a component when I consider using it. Where does it fit in
the "pair of wings" to "dead horse" range?
IMHO, HL7 and Snomed are not on the right side and adopting such
components is like drilling in concrete: it never becomes easier.

When it is about considering costs, I can argue that something that is
"not well born" will cost considerably more than necessary during its
entire life span. Any such technique is hard to build, hard to integrate
and hard to maintain. As a guy that built and operate a self made 54000
atomic terms ontology, I can tell you that addressing this issue in the
proper way can save considerable amount of money and (this is the most
important part of it) free considerable energy that can be invested in
reinventing health instead of plaguing practitioners with new burdens.

My aim with this "troll" was just to tell that this kind of questioning
exists and also that some "fools" are currently joining to create what
they think could be "well born components".

I have the feeling that it is high time we "leapfrog" in being able to
"organize the journey" from the patient's "bio-psycho-social bubble"
instead of getting dedicated to "siloed care center boxes"... and that
HL7 and Snomed will keep their users in the wrong reference frame.

Time will tell... but interesting times ahead!

Philippe


Le 13/03/2018 à 11:05, Grahame Grieve a écrit :
> hi Philippe
>
> No one who's actually tried to use Snomed CT could think that in it's
> current form it's the answer to everything.
> But anyone who's tried to work on real terminologies must also be
> aware of just how much work is involved in these things.
>
> So there's very much a glass half full/empty thing here. I understand
> not being thrilled with Snomed CT as a choice, but as the french
> government, for instance, actually confronted how much more it will
> cost to do something else? 
>
> There's more than one kind of club to have that wastes money....
>
> I've had a quick look at Meriterm... like all good rdf, it's not
> easily penetrable. But it looks like the authors are not informed
> about Cimino's desiderata... which brings us back to the wasting money
> thing...
>
> Grahame
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 8:19 PM, Philippe Ameline
> <philippe.amel...@free.fr <mailto:philippe.amel...@free.fr>> wrote:
>
>     Pablo, I wish you sincerely all the best.
>
>     IMHO, the question is not really to enroll but to deliver... and
>     considering the tremendous amount of money that was invested in
>     HL7 and Snomed (both to elaborate and try to implement) and the
>     actual societal return, there is such a discrepancy that the
>     hypothesis that, due to missing the "information society" turn,
>     health systems are entering terrible crisis times is to be
>     considered seriously.
>
>     In current "information society", you have two options when
>     considering "health information systems":
>     1) You dedicate yourself to "medical information systems" instead,
>     and can freely build for (inter-connected) silos,
>     2) You consider "health" in its genuine meaning and you have to
>     realize that it is a complex domain fully opened to all other
>     societal issues... hence should ban components that are endemic to
>     medicine.
>
>     Maybe (and I really mean it for Latin America), it should be high
>     time to leapfrog, not to join the "dollars wasting club" ;-)
>
>     Philippe
>
>
>     Le 12/03/2018 à 18:17, Pablo Pazos a écrit :
>>     In Latin America is all the contrary, more countries are becoming
>>     SNOMED members and adopting SNOMED at the govt level.
>>
>>     On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 10:18 AM, Philippe Ameline
>>     <philippe.amel...@free.fr <mailto:philippe.amel...@free.fr>> wrote:
>>
>>         Le 12/03/2018 à 01:38, Pablo Pazos a écrit :
>>
>>         > IMO we should focus on SNOMED.
>>
>>         Hi,
>>
>>         There is currently some kind of interesting momentum against
>>         Snomed.
>>
>>         It can come from governments that refuse to pay for it
>>         (current mood in
>>         France), of from practitioners who, after having been asked
>>         by their gov
>>         to "sort out their Snomed subset" came to the conclusion that
>>         it doesn't
>>         exist.
>>
>>         <Troll>Some also predict that the most certain result of
>>         keeping up
>>         trying to build systems using such shitty fully endemic
>>         components is to
>>         have medical doctors disappear from missing the "information
>>         society"
>>         turn.</Troll>
>>
>>         Have some of you been aware of the Meriterm (European) project?
>>
>>         Best,
>>
>>         Philippe
>>
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         openEHR-technical mailing list
>>         openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
>>         <mailto:openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org>
>>         
>> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
>>         
>> <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     -- 
>>     Ing. Pablo Pazos Gutiérrez
>>     pablo.pa...@cabolabs.com <mailto:pablo.pa...@cabolabs.com>
>>     +598 99 043 145 <tel:+598%2099%20043%20145>
>>     skype: cabolabs
>>      <http://cabolabs.com/>
>>     http://www.cabolabs.com <http://www.cabolabs.com/>
>>     https://cloudehrserver.com <https://cloudehrserver.com/>
>>     Subscribe to our newsletter <http://eepurl.com/b_w_tj>
>>
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     openEHR-technical mailing list
>>     openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
>>     <mailto:openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org>
>>     
>> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
>>     
>> <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     openEHR-technical mailing list
>     openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
>     <mailto:openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org>
>     
> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
>     
> <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> -----
> http://www.healthintersections.com.au /
> grah...@healthintersections.com.au
> <mailto:grah...@healthintersections.com.au> / +61 411 867 065
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org

_______________________________________________
openEHR-technical mailing list
openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org

Reply via email to