Multiple parents and max number of nested specialized archetypes?
I should note that in the next generation of archetypes and tooling, archetype 'source' files for specialised archetypes will be 'differential' in nature - i.e. valid ADL, but containing only added and changed items from the parent, just as for subclasses in an object-oriented programming environment. This is excellent news - I was going to launch into a tirade this afternoon about how archetype specialisation requires repeating the whole parent definition, and how much more robust OO subclassing is because of the differential nature! Good thing I held off on my venting.. :) A while back there was talk of a confluence wiki being set up for storing of some of these thoughts?? Is anything happening in that area? I can help out if any admin is required - I just installed Jira and Confluence on my own machines.. Andrew
Multiple parents and max number of nested specialized archetypes?
Hi! Interesting discussion. I'm hope we can avoid multiple inheritance in archetype specialisation. It will be interesting to see how far one can get just using single inheritance and inclusion (clusters etc). On 10/17/07, Koray Atalag atalagk at yahoo.com wrote: There are now two alternative archetypes, one designed for NHS by Ocean which is already a specialization of general histology archetype and the other archetype I am currently modeling, Bethesda System 2001. I have not experimented yet if my archetype can be redesigned as a specialization of NHS archetype (PAP) or be a an alternative archetype for the same purpose possibly for use at a different setting. In the case of having two separate alternative archetypes, I thought of having a further specialized archetype which conforms to both parents. I think this is possible and useful. What is different and what is in common in the two 'smear' archetype approaches (Bethesda v.s. NHS)? Sorry if this is a stupid question coming from a non-clinician. Does the reasoning in the paper... http://www.openehr.org/publications/archetypes/templates_and_archetypes_heard_et_al.pdf ...regarding organisational vs ontological models apply to this or are the differences of another nature? Can one share important sub-parts without sharing view on process and structure. If so, will the information entered using the two different archetypes be computable in a similar way for e.g. decision support systems. Perhaps the best will be to agree on one archetype in this case if possible, but I assume similar cases will surface again. From a technical perspective it is interesting to discuss how far one can get in reaching clinical consensus in 'ontological' sub parts. Splitting things up in too many small 'consensus pieces' without sharing encompassing structure is also likely to have negative impact on semantic interoperability. Best regards, Erik Sundvall erisu at imt.liu.sehttp://www.imt.liu.se/~erisu/Tel: +46-13-227579
Multiple parents and max number of nested specialized archetypes?
An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20071018/3535f029/attachment.html -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: OceanC_small.png Type: image/png Size: 4972 bytes Desc: not available URL: http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20071018/3535f029/attachment.png
Multiple parents and max number of nested specialized archetypes?
Hi, I also think we should avoid multiple inheritance - it is complex enough the way it is - from a tooling as well as from an archetype design point of view. We don't need to make it complicated in addition to complex. Like Erik, I don't know the details of these two archetypes, but I think a better design than using multiple inheritance would be to - use a common base archetype for both. Here everything that the two archetypes have in common (even if it is a little bit more generic than it would be when only considering one of them) can be located. And also everything that doesn't largely overlap can be located as optional items - even if it doesn't have any relevance to the NHS and or Bethesda. - If really necessary specialise this base archetype for the environment, but preferably use templates to achieve this (strip out unnecessary items in your environment, further constrain the archetype etc.) Cheers Sebastian -Original Message- From: Erik Sundvall [mailto:erisu at imt.liu.se] Sent: Thursday, 18 October 2007 5:04 PM To: For openEHR technical discussions Subject: Re: Multiple parents and max number of nested specialized archetypes? Hi! Interesting discussion. I'm hope we can avoid multiple inheritance in archetype specialisation. It will be interesting to see how far one can get just using single inheritance and inclusion (clusters etc). On 10/17/07, Koray Atalag atalagk at yahoo.com wrote: There are now two alternative archetypes, one designed for NHS by Ocean which is already a specialization of general histology archetype and the other archetype I am currently modeling, Bethesda System 2001. I have not experimented yet if my archetype can be redesigned as a specialization of NHS archetype (PAP) or be a an alternative archetype for the same purpose possibly for use at a different setting. In the case of having two separate alternative archetypes, I thought of having a further specialized archetype which conforms to both parents. I think this is possible and useful. What is different and what is in common in the two 'smear' archetype approaches (Bethesda v.s. NHS)? Sorry if this is a stupid question coming from a non-clinician. Does the reasoning in the paper... http://www.openehr.org/publications/archetypes/templates_and_archetypes_ he ard_et_al.pdf ...regarding organisational vs ontological models apply to this or are the differences of another nature? Can one share important sub-parts without sharing view on process and structure. If so, will the information entered using the two different archetypes be computable in a similar way for e.g. decision support systems. Perhaps the best will be to agree on one archetype in this case if possible, but I assume similar cases will surface again. From a technical perspective it is interesting to discuss how far one can get in reaching clinical consensus in 'ontological' sub parts. Splitting things up in too many small 'consensus pieces' without sharing encompassing structure is also likely to have negative impact on semantic interoperability. Best regards, Erik Sundvall erisu at imt.liu.sehttp://www.imt.liu.se/~erisu/Tel: +46-13-227579 ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
Multiple parents and max number of nested specialized archetypes?
Koray Atalag wrote: In my former message, with the question of writing down B and A for spelicalization section of C, I was proposing to write down the names of all archetypes till the top level in specialization archetype- like an absolute specialization path. This I think is not true multiple-inheritance as in any instance of this specialized archetype, it will conform to only one parent and not inherit non-conforming stuff from both parents, but the applications working at the level of the parent archetypes shall be able to use this data seamlessly. Maybe ridiculous but I want to name it as 'multiple-generalization' :D Hi Koray, now I understand what you want. You want the 'inheritance-flattened' form of a specialisation archetype - i.e with everything in it due to all parents. This happens to be the current form of archeypes anyway. We are converting over to the differential form used in object-oriented programming very soon (in .adls files), but the flat form will still be avalable (.adl files), generated and validated rather than directly created as they are today. In the current form of the .adl file we don't mention the lineage of parents all the way to the top. It would be easy enough to do, although I don't quite see what use it would be. - thomas
Multiple parents and max number of nested specialized archetypes?
Erik Sundvall wrote: Hi! Can one share important sub-parts without sharing view on process and structure. If so, will the information entered using the two different archetypes be computable in a similar way for e.g. decision support systems. this is why we have Cluster Structure archetypes that are routinely shared via slots in various other archetypes - it provides a high degree of re-use, just as for classes referencing other classes (assocation, aggregation) in the object paradigm . - thomas
Multiple parents and max number of nested specialized archetypes?
My approach would is in synch with Sebastian - ideally one maximum data set of all content for one pap archetype, from any source or standard, then constrained in a template for Bethesda's purposes, NHS' needs etc. Then the data has maximal interoperability and queryability. In this case you wouldn't need multiple inheritance - I think the key is in the 'art' of the design of the initial and maximal pap archetype. Heather -Original Message- From: openehr-technical-bounces at openehr.org [mailto:openehr-technical- bounces at openehr.org] On Behalf Of Sebastian Garde Sent: Thursday, 18 October 2007 8:46 AM To: For openEHR technical discussions Subject: RE: Multiple parents and max number of nested specialized archetypes? Hi, I also think we should avoid multiple inheritance - it is complex enough the way it is - from a tooling as well as from an archetype design point of view. We don't need to make it complicated in addition to complex. Like Erik, I don't know the details of these two archetypes, but I think a better design than using multiple inheritance would be to - use a common base archetype for both. Here everything that the two archetypes have in common (even if it is a little bit more generic than it would be when only considering one of them) can be located. And also everything that doesn't largely overlap can be located as optional items - even if it doesn't have any relevance to the NHS and or Bethesda. - If really necessary specialise this base archetype for the environment, but preferably use templates to achieve this (strip out unnecessary items in your environment, further constrain the archetype etc.) Cheers Sebastian -Original Message- From: Erik Sundvall [mailto:erisu at imt.liu.se] Sent: Thursday, 18 October 2007 5:04 PM To: For openEHR technical discussions Subject: Re: Multiple parents and max number of nested specialized archetypes? Hi! Interesting discussion. I'm hope we can avoid multiple inheritance in archetype specialisation. It will be interesting to see how far one can get just using single inheritance and inclusion (clusters etc). On 10/17/07, Koray Atalag atalagk at yahoo.com wrote: There are now two alternative archetypes, one designed for NHS by Ocean which is already a specialization of general histology archetype and the other archetype I am currently modeling, Bethesda System 2001. I have not experimented yet if my archetype can be redesigned as a specialization of NHS archetype (PAP) or be a an alternative archetype for the same purpose possibly for use at a different setting. In the case of having two separate alternative archetypes, I thought of having a further specialized archetype which conforms to both parents. I think this is possible and useful. What is different and what is in common in the two 'smear' archetype approaches (Bethesda v.s. NHS)? Sorry if this is a stupid question coming from a non-clinician. Does the reasoning in the paper... http://www.openehr.org/publications/archetypes/templates_and_archetypes_ he ard_et_al.pdf ...regarding organisational vs ontological models apply to this or are the differences of another nature? Can one share important sub-parts without sharing view on process and structure. If so, will the information entered using the two different archetypes be computable in a similar way for e.g. decision support systems. Perhaps the best will be to agree on one archetype in this case if possible, but I assume similar cases will surface again. From a technical perspective it is interesting to discuss how far one can get in reaching clinical consensus in 'ontological' sub parts. Splitting things up in too many small 'consensus pieces' without sharing encompassing structure is also likely to have negative impact on semantic interoperability. Best regards, Erik Sundvall erisu at imt.liu.sehttp://www.imt.liu.se/~erisu/Tel: +46-13-227579 ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical __ NOD32 2599 (20071017) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com
Multiple parents and max number of nested specialized archetypes?
ah - 'data quality' in other words - i.e. markers / meta-data relating to the data capture from the source, not the integrity of the data as represented on the openEHR system? I would like to expand that to data quality assurance. How can one objectively and according to locally accepted standards establish that data is of good quality, i.e. (re)usable, or should be rejected/ ignored. IMHO this is one of the crucial points for a functional EHR. What's the use of a centralized system to store and retrieve semantically interoperable data if the data is of poor/unknown quality. It also has a legal aspect. When one uses data provided by a third party one also takes over/ shares responsibility from/with that third party if one willingly accept data of poor quality. My guess is that not many people want to do that. Cheers, Stef
Multiple parents and max number of nested specialized archetypes?
Hi Erik, Yes, clusters used in the way you describe can be queried upon just like any other class of archetype. It is one way to handle these issues, but still the 'purer' methodology for a Pap smear report, in this case, would be to aim for a maximal Pap report archetype and use the template to constrain it for specific purpose. Clusters are in use all through the NHS archetypes/templates. I have found them especially useful in examination-related archetypes for very simple and universal concepts eg dimension, inspection, etc. These clusters will pop up amongst a large range of archetypes. So you will be able to query for a width or length in whatever part of the EHR a dimension cluster is used. I guess that it could follow that it is possible to consider using the cluster as the common 'child' archetype within 2 distinct 'parent' entry archetypes to mimic multiple inheritance. But it is not recommended. The cluster class has limited functionality compared to entry classes - eg it is limited without event model etc - a cluster has just data and no state, events, protocol associated with it. These data elements would be necessary in a Pap report - I don't think you could get away with these being in each parent. After all you are already losing some of the commonality - the very thing that you are trying to use the cluster for - if you have to put the same event or state data back up into each 'parent' entry archetype. Hope this helps clarify rather than confuse. Heather -Original Message- From: openehr-technical-bounces at openehr.org [mailto:openehr-technical- bounces at openehr.org] On Behalf Of Erik Sundvall Sent: Thursday, 18 October 2007 1:00 PM To: For openEHR technical discussions Subject: Re: Multiple parents and max number of nested specialized archetypes? Hi! I know that it is technically possible. ;-) I was trying to ask if it was clinically possible to identify clusters etc in this specific case. Sorry for not being specific enough in the question. After I asked some good suggestions regarding template use have been posted as a good reminder that there is usually more than one solution. Thanks! // Erik Erik Sundvall wrote: Can one share important sub-parts without sharing view on process and structure. If so, will the information entered using the two different archetypes be computable in a similar way for e.g. decision support systems. On 10/18/07, Thomas Beale thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com wrote: this is why we have Cluster Structure archetypes that are routinely shared via slots in various other archetypes - it provides a high degree of re-use, just as for classes referencing other classes (assocation, aggregation) in the object paradigm . ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical __ NOD32 2600 (20071018) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com
MIE2008 openEHR workshops?
Hi! Is anybody else planning to do openEHR related workshops at MIE2008 in in G?teborg (Gothenburg), Sweden May 25-28, 2008? http://www.mie2008.org/ We (our MI group at Link?ping University) are planning to coordinate a general openEHR overview workshop targeted towards people unfamiliar with openEHR. The MIE workshop will of course be in English, but we also want to run the same workshop in Swedish since a major Swedish health IT event Vitalis is collocated with MIE. Important dates Open for submissions: 2007-09-15 Deadline for paper and poster of submissions: Monday 2007-11-05 Deadline for all other submissions: Monday 2007-11-18 Notification of acceptance: 2008-02-01 At least one author has to sign up before: 2008-03-01 Deadline for final camera ready version of accepted submissions: 2008-03-01 Best regards, Erik Sundvall erisu at imt.liu.sehttp://www.imt.liu.se/~erisu/Tel: +46-13-227579
Multiple parents and max number of nested specialized archetypes?
On Oct 18, 2007, at 5:51 PM, Heather Leslie wrote: Hi Erik, Yes, clusters used in the way you describe can be queried upon just like any other class of archetype. It is one way to handle these issues, but still the 'purer' methodology for a Pap smear report, in this case, would be to aim for a maximal Pap report archetype and use the template to constrain it for specific purpose. I agree. Clusters are in use all through the NHS archetypes/templates. I have found them especially useful in examination-related archetypes for very simple and universal concepts eg dimension, inspection, etc. These clusters will pop up amongst a large range of archetypes. So you will be able to query for a width or length in whatever part of the EHR a dimension cluster is used. In other words there are 'atomic archetypes'. These 'atomic archetype's re-appear in normal archetypes to be finally constrained in Templates. The Template is the profiling tool to make things explicit in a defined healthcare context. I guess that it could follow that it is possible to consider using the cluster as the common 'child' archetype within 2 distinct 'parent' entry archetypes to mimic multiple inheritance. But it is not recommended. The cluster class has limited functionality compared to entry classes - eg it is limited without event model etc - a cluster has just data and no state, events, protocol associated with it. These data elements would be necessary in a Pap report - I don't think you could get away with these being in each parent. After all you are already losing some of the commonality - the very thing that you are trying to use the cluster for - if you have to put the same event or state data back up into each 'parent' entry archetype. Here I need some explanatory elaborations to make things very explicit. Hope this helps clarify rather than confuse. Heather -Original Message- From: openehr-technical-bounces at openehr.org [mailto:openehr- technical- bounces at openehr.org] On Behalf Of Erik Sundvall Sent: Thursday, 18 October 2007 1:00 PM To: For openEHR technical discussions Subject: Re: Multiple parents and max number of nested specialized archetypes? Hi! I know that it is technically possible. ;-) I was trying to ask if it was clinically possible to identify clusters etc in this specific case. Sorry for not being specific enough in the question. After I asked some good suggestions regarding template use have been posted as a good reminder that there is usually more than one solution. Thanks! // Erik Erik Sundvall wrote: Can one share important sub-parts without sharing view on process and structure. If so, will the information entered using the two different archetypes be computable in a similar way for e.g. decision support systems. On 10/18/07, Thomas Beale thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com wrote: this is why we have Cluster Structure archetypes that are routinely shared via slots in various other archetypes - it provides a high degree of re-use, just as for classes referencing other classes (assocation, aggregation) in the object paradigm . ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical __ NOD32 2600 (20071018) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20071018/528f1fc7/attachment.html
Questions on EHR implementation
Please include this address when you send the documentation to Mr. Bullen. Many thanks. JV On 10/18/07, Sam Heard sam.heard at oceaninformatics.com wrote: Mike Ocean has implemented openEHR in the .Net environment. I will send you the documentation. Cheers, Sam Mike Bullen wrote: GlobalHealthUSA would like to design and implement an EHR system for their disease management system platform. We would like to use OpenEHR but have the following questions: 1. Can OpenEHR be implemented in a windows(MS) .NET environment? 2. Can OpenEHR be used to develop an ISP version so several doctors can use it? 3. Has any one done such an implementation before, if so is there any web documentation? 4. Can we use our existing SQL 2005(MS) database? 5. Is there an existing client used to access OpenEHR? 6. What do we need to download and from where? Thank you Mike Bullen -- ___ openEHR-technical mailing listopenEHR-technical at openehr.orghttp://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical -- Dr Sam Heard Chief Executive Officer Ocean Informatics Director, openEHR Foundation Adj. Professor, Central Queensland University Senior Visiting Research Fellow, University College London Aus: +61 4 1783 8808 UK: +44 77 9871 0980 ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20071018/50093781/attachment.html
software development starting out
Hi, As someone who is an OpenEHR novice can you give me any tips - there is so much information on the website it is difficult to know where to start. While I have yet to understand the full potential of the framework, I would like to start with something simple. Suppose a surgeon signs onto my system and wishes to create a new progress note. On paper he may have written (swapping out the ) age, sex with ESLD admitted with dehydration Received n ml/kg of volume resuscitation last night. Went to OR for CVL placement, transferred to ICU for management after OR. a) Send bacterial infection if stooling b) Re|start med for wound infection c) Check weights d) etc. _ How does OpenEHR come into play with this action - Should provide lookups or force sentence structure? Should it be used to define and store the content into discrete data? What data source or service would my code interact with? I guess I have many questions, and I apologize in advance if I miss some concepts. thanks! Greg Boston, MA http://www.patientos.org
Questions on EHR implementation
Hi Sam, Could you email me the documentation as well? I have been very interested in this for a long time and even tried to volunteer to help write the code. Thanks, Sam Heard sam.heard at oceaninformatics.com wrote: Mike Ocean has implemented openEHR in the .Net environment. I will send you the documentation. Cheers, Sam Mike Bullen wrote: GlobalHealthUSA would like to design and implement an EHR system for their disease management system platform. We would like to use OpenEHR but have the following questions: Can OpenEHR be implemented in a windows(MS) .NET environment? Can OpenEHR be used to develop an ISP version so several doctors can use it? Has any one done such an implementation before, if so is there any web documentation? Can we use our existing SQL 2005(MS) database? Is there an existing client used to access OpenEHR? What do we need to download and from where? Thank you Mike Bullen - ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical -- Dr Sam Heard Chief Executive Officer Ocean Informatics Director, openEHR Foundation Adj. Professor, Central Queensland University Senior Visiting Research Fellow, University College London Aus: +61 4 1783 8808 UK: +44 77 9871 0980 ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20071018/7f2b05d2/attachment.html -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/png Size: 4972 bytes Desc: not available URL: http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20071018/7f2b05d2/attachment.png
software development starting out
Hi, I recommend that you start reading the Architecture Overview which gives a overview of the ideas behind openEHR. You can find the current version at the URL http://svn.openehr.org/specification/TAGS/Release-1.0.1/publishing/architect ure/overview.pdf . If you would like to have a little ?hands on? experience of archetypes is it probably a good idea to download an archetype editor and play around with it. The Link?ping University Archetype Editor can be found at the URL http://www.imt.liu.se/mi/ehr/tools/ and the Ocean Archetype editor at the URL http://downloads.oceaninformatics.com/products/archetypeeditor/ . Greetings, Mikael Nystr?m Medical Informatics Department of Biomedical Engineering Link?ping University Sweden -Original Message- From: openehr-technical-boun...@openehr.org [mailto:openehr-technical-bounces at openehr.org] On Behalf Of Greg Caulton Sent: den 18 oktober 2007 21:15 To: openehr-technical at openehr.org Subject: software development starting out Hi, As someone who is an OpenEHR novice can you give me any tips - there is so much information on the website it is difficult to know where to start. While I have yet to understand the full potential of the framework, I would like to start with something simple. Suppose a surgeon signs onto my system and wishes to create a new progress note. On paper he may have written (swapping out the ) age, sex with ESLD admitted with dehydration Received n ml/kg of volume resuscitation last night. Went to OR for CVL placement, transferred to ICU for management after OR. a) Send bacterial infection if stooling b) Re|start med for wound infection c) Check weights d) etc. _ How does OpenEHR come into play with this action - Should provide lookups or force sentence structure? Should it be used to define and store the content into discrete data? What data source or service would my code interact with? I guess I have many questions, and I apologize in advance if I miss some concepts. thanks! Greg Boston, MA http://www.patientos.org ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
