RE: initial states for instructions / when do we need actions?

[Heath Frankel]

Hi Pablo,
Some comments below.

Heath

From: openEHR-technical [mailto:openehr-technical-boun...@lists.openehr.org] On 
Behalf Of pablo pazos
Sent: Tuesday, 12 July 2016 12:29 PM
To: openeh technical ; openehr clinical 
; s...@lists.openehr.org
Subject: ISM: initial states for instructions / when do we need actions?

Hi all,

This message is related to my previous message "ACTIVITY.description vs 
ACTION.description archetypes‏" (didn't got any answers :( but this is focused 
on when we need actions to change a instruction state, and what's the initial 
state.

Considering the specs:
http://www.openehr.org/releases/RM/latest/docs/ehr/ehr.html#_the_standard_instruction_state_machine_ism

I think when an instruction is firstly recorded, it should have a state. But 
I'm not 100% if that state should be INITIAL, or can also be PLANNED, SCHEDULED 
or ACTIVE, since at least for SCHEDULED and ACTIVE I think we need an ACTION to 
be recorded to trigger the transition, but it is not clear that we need that to 
trigger the transition "initiate (INITIAL -> PLANNED)".

[HKF: ] I personally consider the Initial state as your standard state diagram 
starting point rather than a usable state. The AE has allowed the initial state 
to be used, which I think is incorrect and we translate this to a subsequent 
state for real use.

1- Is INITIAL the state associated with an instruction when no action is 
recorded?

[HKF: ] This is how I consider this. In fact I usually explain to my developers 
that an instruction is not initiated unless there is an action to start the 
instructions workflow. Without an action, it is just a definition of an 
instruction that is waiting to have its workflow started.

2- If what it's recorded is a medication prescription, I guess the initial 
state should be PLANNED, do we need to record an action alongside with the 
instruction to make the "initiate (INITIAL -> PLANNED)" transition? OR, we can 
just set the initial state to PLANNED, even though no actions are recorded for 
the instruction/activity?

[HKF: ] As indicated, I would have an ACTION with a PLANNED state to make this 
clear. You may choose to go straight to Active.

3- On the case of recording a treatment that should be scheduled, do we also 
need an action to trigger the "schedule (INITIAL -> SCHEDULED)" transition? (I 
guess yes if the instruction is created at one time, and the schedule comes 
later).

[HKF: ] As above.

3.1- If yes, what happens on the case the instruction includes scheduling? 
Should we include an action to trigger the transition or can we set the state 
to SCHEDULED directly?

[HKF: ] Sorry, I don’t understand this one.

At least for me this is not 100% on the specs. If this happens to others, we 
might need to improve the specs and add more examples to make this topic clear 
for newcomers.

Thanks!


--
Kind regards,
Eng. Pablo Pazos Gutiérrez
http://cabolabs.com
___
openEHR-technical mailing list
openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org

RE: Shouldn't INSTRUCTION_DETAILS.wf_details be archetypable?

[Heath Frankel]

Hi Pablo,
Since wf_details is ITEM_STRUCTURE, then yes it can be archetyped. Just because 
the AE doesn't support it does not change this fact. As is this case in many 
software projects, functionality in the AE was built on as needed basis so I 
would suggest that no one has needed it to date. Since the AE was almost 100% 
contributed by Ocean Informatics, the priorities around "as needed" was 
evaluated by Ocean. However, the AE is open source so others can add their own 
capabilities if they desire.

Heath

From: openEHR-technical [mailto:openehr-technical-boun...@lists.openehr.org] On 
Behalf Of pablo pazos
Sent: Tuesday, 12 July 2016 2:36 PM
To: openeh technical ; openehr clinical 
; s...@lists.openehr.org
Subject: Shouldn't INSTRUCTION_DETAILS.wf_details be archetypable?

Looking at the model, INSTRUCTION_DETAILS.wf_details is an ITEM_STRUCTURE, and 
that lead me to think that should be archetypable.

Playing around with the archetype editor, it doesn't allow to archetype 
anything inside INSTRUCTION.instruction_details.

Is this a problem of the AE or that structure is not meant to be archetyped?

If it is not meant to be archetyped, wouldn't that be an issue for querying?

Thanks!

--
Kind regards,
Eng. Pablo Pazos Gutiérrez
http://cabolabs.com
___
openEHR-technical mailing list
openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org

RE: Do you know of any new openEHR projects?

[pablo pazos]

Hi Thomas, this one is missing: the EHRServer http://cabolabs.com/en/projects

Is foss and Apache 2. Let me know if you need more info!

-- 
Kind regards,
Eng. Pablo Pazos Gutiérrez
http://cabolabs.com

To: openehr-technical@lists.openehr.org; openehr-clini...@lists.openehr.org
From: thomas.be...@openehr.org
Subject: Do you know of any new openEHR projects?
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 18:51:42 +0100


  


  
  


We have updated the EHR System
  Components page with some of the newer projects we know about.
This page doesn't include the commercial products from the vendor pages
(maybe it should? Opinions welcome).



Do you know of other projects - open source or other? Do you have
more details for the above page?



You can provide information on the lists or by commenting on this issue.



- thomas

  


___
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

Re: RM in OWL

[Matheus Wichman]

Hi Seref,

The ontologies available on the link you posted were developed using an old
specification of RM.

I converted the current RM to OWL, like Isabel did. However I had some
problems to represent list structures.

2016-07-12 13:02 GMT-03:00 Seref Arikan :

> Greetings,
>
> I was wondering if there is any projects out there that provide an OWL
> version of the RM.
>
> I found this page: http://trajano.us.es/~isabel/EHR/ where an OWL version
> is kindly provided, though I'll need to get in touch with the author to
> clarify the terms and conditions of use.
>
> There are papers out there that use an OWL representation of archetypes
> etc but I could not find any RM representation other than the link above.
> Any pointers would be appreciated.
>
> Cheers
> Seref
>
> ___
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical@lists.openehr.org
>
> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
>



-- 
Atenciosamente,

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

Do you know of any new openEHR projects?

[Thomas Beale]

We have updated the EHR System Components page 
 with some of the newer 
projects we know about. This page doesn't include the commercial 
products from the vendor pages 
(maybe it should? 
Opinions welcome).


Do you know of other projects - open source or other? Do you have more 
details for the above page?


You can provide information on the lists or by commenting on this issue 
.


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

RM in OWL

[Seref Arikan]

Greetings,

I was wondering if there is any projects out there that provide an OWL
version of the RM.

I found this page: http://trajano.us.es/~isabel/EHR/ where an OWL version
is kindly provided, though I'll need to get in touch with the author to
clarify the terms and conditions of use.

There are papers out there that use an OWL representation of archetypes etc
but I could not find any RM representation other than the link above. Any
pointers would be appreciated.

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