Re: Re: Generic modeling and issues for querying

Solution is easy, just created specific structures for the results of some test that I needed to store and query so I have different node ids on each analyte. That will allow me to query, create some CDS rules and some fancy indicators for reports :) On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 7:36 AM Karsten

Re: Re: Re: [Troll] Terminology bindings ... again

I got it, when I said standardizing diagnosis you might thought of your specific implementation / experience. But I was talking about the strategy, not the implementation. The strategy can be good and implementations fail miserably, is not a problem of the strategy :) As I said, primary coding

Aw: Re: Re: [Troll] Terminology bindings ... again

 There are 3 ways of "coding" that I know of: 1. primary coding (ask clinicians and other clinical users to code directly), 2. secondary coding (users record information, a team of specialists do the coding later), 3. assisted coding (software helps users to code, and there are many ways of

Aw: Re: Re: [Troll] Terminology bindings ... again

>>> just imagine standardizing every diagnosis >> That typically leads to either bad statistics or disimproved care. > Can I ask why? It of course depends on the suitability of the standardization process (as in the applicability of a coding system to the domain - medically and in purpose). It

Re: Re: [Troll] Terminology bindings ... again

It is a very very very bad practice to ask clinicians to code! Standardizing diagnosis is a very different thing than asking clinicians to code, the first is the strategy, the second is one possible, and bad, implementation. There are 3 ways of "coding" that I know of: 1. primary coding (ask

Re: Re: [Troll] Terminology bindings ... again

I assume the reason is that asking clinicians to do coding without any help provides great variability and leads to coding errors. What Thomas said about presenting clinicians with addecuated subsets is key to avoid that. There are also mechanisms to check coding quality/errors, but usually need

Re: Re: [Troll] Terminology bindings ... again

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 2:15 PM, Karsten Hilbert wrote: > > just imagine standardizing every diagnosis > > That typically leads to either bad statistics or disimproved care. > Can I ask why? > > Karsten > > ___ >

Aw: Re: Re: Blockchain

> You may want to check internet access packages in the Himalayas or Sahara > before you setup shop there Bert ;) As for that, Namche had faster internet than myself at home, last time I checked. Karsten ___ openEHR-technical mailing list

Re: Re: Scenarios for change type "deleted"

If someone wants to read that email. I can forward it, it is in Dutch that is why I don't post it here. Next may, 2018, the new European privacy regulations will become effective. Op di 7 nov. 2017 18:15 schreef Bert Verhees : > I just received ab email about this. In

Re: Re: Scenarios for change type "deleted"

I just received ab email about this. In Dutch from the Dutch Authority Privacy (Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens ) The DPIA mentions very explicitly right on correction and right on removal. Else the system owner will be fined. It is European law. No room for discussions or ethical considerations.

Re: Re: Re: Scenarios for change type "deleted"

Hi Birger, as a GP in Germany I know what you are talking about :) > b) Implementing such a process was demanded by the state data protection > commissioner. I'm not sure how realistic this would be, but such a network > heavily relies on patients' trust. If there is doubt, you lose. Assuming a

Aw: Re: Re: Scenarios for change type "deleted"

Hi Karsten, a) these repos are not the primary sources of the data. Hence, the deadlines do not apply! b) Implementing such a process was demanded by the state data protection commissioner. I'm not sure how realistic this would be, but such a network heavily relies on patients' trust. If there

Re: Re: Scenarios for change type "deleted"

On Sun, Nov 05, 2017 at 05:31:50PM +0100, Birger Haarbrandt wrote: > just a short remark: we were involved in a regional EHR (in the sense of a > health information exchange network) project in the state of Lower-Saxony, > Germany. While this might be a different use case, we clearly had to be

Re: RE:

Hi Hildi, Should not be. Most probably it was a temp glitch :) On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 9:01 AM, Hildegard Franke wrote: > Is there a firewall issue on the UCL website if you are accessing from > abroad? > > Kind regards > > Hildi > > Kind regards > > Hildi > > Hildegard

Re: RE:

Is there a firewall issue on the UCL website if you are accessing from abroad? Kind regards Hildi Kind regards Hildi Hildegard Franke Chief Operations Officer mobile: +44 (0)7932 502655 landline: +44 (0)1536 414994 skype: hild5559 twitter: @hildegardfranke LinkedIn

Re: RE:

I can confirm all links work 2017-10-30 9:58 GMT+01:00 Seref Arikan : > Hi Wouter, > > I just checked, and it is working as far as I can see. It should be > http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/1500996/ Does this not work for you? > > On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 8:54 AM,

Re: RE:

Hi Wouter, I just checked, and it is working as far as I can see. It should be http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/1500996/ Does this not work for you? On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 8:54 AM, Wouter Zanen wrote: > Hi, > > The link to the full thesis on the openEHR website doesn't

Re: RE: Archetype relational mapping - a practical openEHR persistence solution

Hi Bert, great to hear that you are working on this! I had in mind that someone from Linkoping University is working on a prototype, Erik Sundvall mentioned it once or twice if I remember correctly. My working group will surely try to find a good solution, too. However it would not make sense

Re: Re: difference and relationship between openEHR and EN13606

See my earlier response. I think that is probably as official as you can expect for now!! 13606 and openEHR share some aspects of their design, there are many formal and informal links between the two communities e.g. Thomas Berale and I are both invited experts to the 13606 group, and there are

[Norton AntiSpam] Re: Re: Suggestions re Term binding in Archetype Editor

2006/12/19, Williamtfgoossen at cs.com Williamtfgoossen at cs.com: In een bericht met de datum 18-12-2006 18:00:54 West-Europa (standaardtijd), schrijft mattias.forss at gmail.com: Maybe you're right, the definitions could be added as comments, but for proprietary terminology like SNOMED CT

Antw: Re: Re: Suggestions re Term binding in Archetype Editor

In een bericht met de datum 19-12-2006 11:28:56 West-Europa (standaardtijd), schrijft mattias.forss at gmail.com: We'll see about that. Read about the issues with SNOMED and LOINC here A