On Tue, 26 Oct 2004, Joseph Dal Molin wrote: > While the UK has not gone with open source solutions for its health > systems it would be great if they simply adopted open, collaborative > knowledge/experience sharing to support their current EHR deployment > efforts.
Joseph, I am sure NHS can get that too if they are willing to pay for it (in terms of money and other resources/risks). This includes willingness to subject themselves to peer-review. Perhaps this is one of the factors that prevented them from adopting the open source approach in the first place? By selecting the closed-source approach, a big part of their methodology will be inaccessible to the public for review. Best regards, Andrew --- Andrew P. Ho, M.D. OIO: Open Infrastructure for Outcomes www.TxOutcome.Org > Andrew Ho wrote: > > On Tue, 26 Oct 2004, Joseph Dal Molin wrote: > > ... > > > >>Colin Smith. In the fall of 2001 Nigel Bell, the then CEO of the NHS IA > >>gave the following interview: > >> > >>http://www.infomaticsonline.co.uk/news/1125702 > > > > > > Joseph, > > Thanks for the reference. Reading this article, it does look like the > > NHS seriously considered open source. > > > > > > > My interpretation is that NHS decided to fund proprietary software at > > the expense of open source software (for obvious reasons). With that > > decision made, they realized "sitting on the fence" gives a public > > appearance of "confusion" and thus pulled Colin Smith's paper. > > Rather than blaming NHS, I give them credit for valuing and publishing > > Colin Smith's paper and seriously considering open source in the first > > place (and also sponsoring OSHCA 2001). Just because NHS got off the fence > > and gave money to proprietary vendors this time, it does not mean they > > won't make a different decision next time. > > > > Best regards, > > > > Andrew > > --- > > Andrew P. Ho, M.D. > > OIO: Open Infrastructure for Outcomes > > www.TxOutcome.Org > > > > . > > >
