Patrick Lefebvre wrote:
Hi all,
About certification mechanisms... a few remarks.
(1) openEHR (eventually CEN) has to publish a list of standard
tests. I think of conformant messages in different syntaxes (XML,
Corba, etc). These messages may be part of the openEHR /or EHRcom
Hi All,
--- (...)
Been off looking at some operational considerations associated
with supporting, maintaining and updating global EHRs.
The following types of users were considered:
1)CREATORS
2)REVIEWERS
3)ADMINISTRATORS
4)CERTIFIERS
This idea of certification is not only good
Patrick Lefebvre wrote:
Hi All,
--- (...)
Been off looking at some operational considerations associated
with supporting, maintaining and updating global EHRs.
The following types of users were considered:
1)CREATORS
2)REVIEWERS
3)ADMINISTRATORS
4)CERTIFIERS
This idea of
: Re: certification and verification of OpenEHR
Patrick Lefebvre wrote:
Hi All,
--- (...)
Been off looking at some operational considerations associated
with supporting, maintaining and updating global EHRs.
The following types of users were considered:
1)CREATORS
2)REVIEWERS
: Re: certification and verification of OpenEHR
Hi Chris,
One thought to keep in mind regarding:
The EHR efforts seem to want to standardize both the data AND
the horse it rode in on.:
The DATA embedded in an OpenEHR standardized system can be both
extracted and modified. My hunch
Subject: Re: certification and verification of OpenEHR
-
If you have any questions about using this list,
please send a message to d.lloyd at openehr.org
--
Tim C
PGP/GnuPG Key 1024D/EAF993D0 available from keyservers everywhere
or at http://members.optushome.com.au/tchur/pubkey.asc
Key
Christopher Feahr wrote:
Ideally, we should have one geo-politically neutral SDO
maintaining robust communications with a solid, global network of
medical subject matter experts. Then we build straw man
model-components and run them through our expert vetting pool until no
one has substantial
Christopher Feahr wrote:
I'm not sure we are quite ready to think about the big EHR-in-the-Sky
repository that exists ONLY for the purpose of keeping local user
records in synchrony...
I don't think keeping local records in synchrony makes much sense in a
lot of cases. If I were a clinician
On Tue, 2003-08-05 at 07:01, Thomas Beale wrote:
right. This is exactly the openEHR approach. Have a look at the
reference models, including for demographics
(http://www.openehr.org/Doc_html/Model/Reference/demographic.htm), and
you will see that is exactly what the approach is. Actually,
Tim Churches wrote:
On Tue, 2003-08-05 at 07:01, Thomas Beale wrote:
right. This is exactly the openEHR approach. Have a look at the
reference models, including for demographics
(http://www.openehr.org/Doc_html/Model/Reference/demographic.htm), and
you will see that is exactly what the
On Tue, 2003-08-05 at 07:27, Thomas Beale wrote:
Tim Churches wrote:
On Tue, 2003-08-05 at 07:01, Thomas Beale wrote:
right. This is exactly the openEHR approach. Have a look at the
reference models, including for demographics
Christopher Feahr wrote:
With regard to EHRs of all sizes... yes, they will look different, and
if some of those differences were not there, a higher level of
interoperability MIGHT result. But again, I contend that it is the DATA
that is most desperately in need of a standard. The EHR
On Tue, 2003-08-05 at 08:03, Thomas Beale wrote:
sure - and I agree - this is what data warehouses are for. This kind of
querying requires forethought. If you know you are going to be
collecting say 50 statistica, including number of times change
address, then you start designing software
Chris,
If there
aren't very many such repository systems, or if a very large one (say,
one maintained by the US govt.) made its architecture specifications
public, then that might be all the world requires as a de facto standard.
The US govt. has zero credibility right now in many parts of
Dear Chris,
CEN/TC251 is co-operating with OPENEHR.
We are in the process to define a next version of our EHR standard.
It is basicly a standard that defines a Document and facilities for handling
it properly. Plus it will enable to locate doucment items in space and time.
On top of this the
: Re: certification and verification of OpenEHR
Tim,
I can imagine several workable funding models for healthcare. The one
we have in the US is simply the straightforward selling services for
$, perverted by the brokerage model that insurance has superimposed on
it. In my personal opinion
at hcsystems.com; Thomas Beale
thomas at deepthought.com.au; openehr-technical at openehr.org
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 10:20 AM
Subject: Re: certification and verification of OpenEHR
Thomas,
Thanks! And I hardly know where to begin responding... but I do like
all of your comments
, August 05, 2003 1:45 PM
Subject: Re: certification and verification of OpenEHR
Hi Chris,
Good comments. Don't hold back!
Regarding Providers I must say that they surprise me at times. My
primary
Physician obtained a degree in Electrical Engineering prior to his
medical
degrees. He has
Christopher Feahr wrote:
Dear Group,
I have just recently joined your listserve, and have been actively
participating in the HL7 EHR ballot discussion for only a few weeks.
During the four years prior to that, I had been swimming in the
HIPAA-EDI ocean, trying to figure out how the operational
I should have also mentioned another reason why local EMRs have to be
left intact, at least for the time being - it is te psychological one
that their owners will not feel as if they are having their system taken
away from them.
- t
-
If you have any questions about using this list,
please
Thomas Clark wrote:
What was your study to do with?
this is the meat of the problem...
STUDY:
-several counties in California and Nevada ranging from agriculture to
forestry
and their current healthcare systems
-current budgetary constraints and potential for new funding
-can they develop
Congratulations for your comments and remarks; it is the most interesting
message I have read for months. However I have to disagree with what could be
interpreted as
a negative comment against suppliers. I use to tell the users (hospitals
and specially the doctors) that ?People get what they
-4984
Cell: (707) 529-2268
http://Optiserv.com
http://VisionDataStandard.org
- Original Message -
From: Thomas Beale tho...@deepthought.com.au
To: openehr-technical at openehr.org
Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2003 5:01 PM
Subject: Re: certification and verification of OpenEHR
Christopher
; openehr-technical
at openehr.org
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 1:28 AM
Subject: Re: certification and verification of OpenEHR
Congratulations for your comments and remarks; it is the most interesting
message I have read for months. However I have to disagree with what could
1:42 AM
Subject: Re: certification and verification of OpenEHR
Hi,
Constraining every enterprise system to the same physical
record architecture is always denied as an ultimate objective of
EHR... although that *would* be a path to a fairly high level of
user-system interoperability... it's
at openehr.org
Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2003 12:50 PM
Subject: Re: certification and verification of OpenEHR
Hi All,
I would like to add a big 'RIGHT-ON' to Christopher's contribution!
From the operations viewpoint cost is a major factor and when
significant
precludes
participation by parties
at hcsystems.com
Cc: Christopher Feahr chris at optiserv.com; Thomas Beale
thomas at deepthought.com.au; openehr-technical at openehr.org
Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2003 1:59 PM
Subject: Re: certification and verification of OpenEHR
-
If you have any questions about using this list,
please send
-
From: Tim Churches tc...@optushome.com.au
To: Christopher Feahr chris at optiserv.com
Cc: Thomas Clark tclark at hcsystems.com; Thomas Beale
thomas at deepthought.com.au; openehr-technical at openehr.org
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 1:16 PM
Subject: Re: certification and verification of OpenEHR
through adoption
by a hospital group, especially a teaching hospital group.
-Thomas Clark
- Original Message -
From: Thomas Beale tho...@deepthought.com.au
To: openehr-technical at openehr.org
Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2003 8:31 PM
Subject: Re: certification and verification of OpenEHR
: certification and verification of OpenEHR
Hi Thomas,
lakewood at copper.net wrote:
Hi All,
Been off looking at some operational considerations associated with
supporting, maintaining and updating global EHRs.
What was your study to do with? Our analysis of possible EHR users is
that most
Subject: Re: certification and verification of OpenEHR
Dear Group,
I have just recently joined your listserve, and have been actively
participating in the HL7 EHR ballot discussion for only a few weeks.
During the four years prior to that, I had been swimming in the
HIPAA-EDI ocean, trying
Hi Thomas,
Comments in text.
- Original Message -
From: Thomas Beale tho...@deepthought.com.au
To: openehr-technical at openehr.org
Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2003 4:33 PM
Subject: Re: certification and verification of OpenEHR
Hi Thomas,
lakewood at copper.net wrote:
Hi All
32 matches
Mail list logo
