On Tuesday 13 January 2004 17:29, Kevin M Coonan, MD, Univ. Utah School of Medicine wrote:
> In addition, it would be worth investigating how "modular" the > components are, and how well the "back end" accepts other applications, > or are these projects mutually exclusive without extensive coding? Concur. There are also some specific tasks that are handled well by a specific bit of software adapted to their workflow, and which may be done in several departments by several specialties. Endoscopy comes to mind, where in teh commercial area an Endoscribe is a very effective, but of course stand-alone, tool. ( Actually, I would think that OIO would be particularly good for that sort of task, and for that specific task, particularly if people doing them got together to ensure they were using a common vocabulary as a core. OIO would be a useful element of the prepared exit strategy that all departments dependent on a commercial program and database should have, in case of failure of the company, escalation of their charges, or development not keeping pace with the world changing. ) What I would hope would be that we would see specific tools made by people who do specific things, and a general willingness to write to interfaces that fit _several_ other systems. I think Casualty/Emergency Medicine is an area where there are quite a few well-specified workflows. -- Dr Adrian Midgley I use Free software because it is better http://www.defoam.net/ They carefully didn't ask.
