Hi,
Maybe I misunderstand, maybe someone can help me with this
In the CENTC251 standard there is a GPIC
IdentifiedLivingSubject. It has two Generalisations: SubjectOfInvestigation
and SubjectOfCareIdentification
This happens a lot in the Standard. In my opinion a class can only be a child
of
-- Doorgestuurd bericht --
Subject: Re: OIDs / II
Date: woensdag 20 april 2005 10:33
From: Bert Verhees bert.verh...@rosa.nl
To: openehr-technical at openehr.org
Grahame Grieve wrote:
Regarding OIDs and II, I think there's a misunderstanding
about the point of the OID part
Elkin, Peter L., M.D. wrote:
Dear Roger and Thomas,
We have looked extensively at Multivalued logic for quantitating uncertainty.
It turns out that most folks in that world have taking 0 false and one true
with a number of discrete, usually equally spaced values in between for
uncertainty.
Tim Churches wrote:
Thomas Beale wrote:
I'm wondering if there is a meta-algorithm of some sort lurking behind
the scenes, which takes account of uncertainty in a note, and also
severity of non-discounted possibilities, as a way of deciding what to
do next. There is undoubtedly published work
Dear Thomas,
I think we need clinicians to be more precise in these declarations. If we
begin to train clinicians that Probable should mean ~85% probability +/- 5%
then we will move closer to stability.
Although the goal of reducing uncertainty is in general laudible there are some
problems
was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL:
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20050420/6e7223a5/attachment.asc
6 matches
Mail list logo
