I asked for this to be changed as we had dropped inspired oxygen into a
cluster archetype (intended to sit in state and wanted to be able to state
the assumed value of 23% (or whatever).
I have come round to thinking that Assumed value is actually unhelpful. It
is only a statement on the archetype
> On 8 Oct 2018, at 23:09, Peter Gummer wrote:
>
> ...Attached to this email is the CLUSTER that Ian attached to the Jira issue.
Hmmm, I don’t think this mailing list accepts attachments. Here is the CLUSTER
as ADL.
Peter
archetype (adl_version=1.4)
openEHR-EHR-CLUSTER.ambient_oxygen
Hi Heather,I think I've tracked down why this was changed in the Ocean Archetype Editor. It seems to be this change on 6th May 2012: https://github.com/openEHR/arch_ed-dotnet/commit/bb50d16ad44e910d717c9e75e967fe1b1af36c46 EDT-567: Allow assumed value to be set on any data, not just on patient stat
I totally agree with Sebastian, that's a fight we have had for years while
implementing LinkEHR.
You can of course create an ad hoc tool for openEHR, including all the
usability and additional rules you want. But if your tool is really generic
(i.e. based in a BMM definition of the reference model)
Hi Heather,
Purely technically, I think the answer is "false" - since assumed values are an
available independent of their context (e.g. data or state).
But for all practical modelling I think the answer is "true" - assumed_value
should really be used for protocol/state, but not data.
As for the
Hi everyone,
Assumed value -
https://www.openehr.org/releases/AM/latest/docs/AOM1.4/AOM1.4.html#_assumed_value
I've spoken to Sam Heard on many occasions and I have understood him to say
that the intent for an assumed value to only be relevant for 'State' in an
OBSERVATION. But never in 'Data'
6 matches
Mail list logo
