There doesn't seem to be control of its use. Information (unofficial) of
its copy rights by WONCA is here
http://www.ulb.ac.be/esp/wicc/copyright-en.html
You can download the electronic version of ICPC2 from here.
http://www.ulb.ac.be/esp/wicc/ceo.html
When we started using it 6 years ago,
On Fri, 2006-05-12 at 04:42 -0500, Alvin B. Marcelo wrote:
[KSB] ...snip...
Second thread:
An interesting insight I got at the last Regional Conference in Open
Standards sponsored by NECTEC
and IOSN in Bangkok (May 2-4) -- an Intel smployee (Danese)
emphasized that open standards may
On May 11, 2006, at 10:22 PM, Jason Tan Boon Teck wrote:
BeatriX has a nifty feature - copy image of CD to HDD, and then use
that
image from that point onwards. It's remains as a single image file
on the
HDD and would require a uber l33t to hack that.
I'm afraid that statement uses
...some thoughts...
What would standardizing on ICD-10 mean in the context of an
organization such as OSHCA given the reality the heterogenous landscape
of ICD adoption... what would this mean in real practice? What would
this imply for those systems using ICD - 9 for example? Would it be
It isn't clear to me the role that OSHCA can/should play in the
standards world. It might be useful
for the community to agree on things that everyone will support, but
that alone doesn't make it a standard.
Standards my be dictated by national entities or other bodies outside
the control of
On May 12, 2006, at 8:40 AM, Jason Tan Boon Teck wrote:
On 5/12/06, Franklin M. Siler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On May 11, 2006, at 10:22 PM, Jason Tan Boon Teck wrote:
BeatriX has a nifty feature - copy image of CD to HDD, and then use
that
image from that point onwards. It's remains as a
James Busser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is the way it is and multiple licences are necessary depending on the number of users. Maybe things have changed recently?
Nanda Gunaratne
On May 11, 2006, at 8:23 AM, David Forslund wrote:
In the US (and UK) SNOMED-CT is freely
On May 12, 2006, at 9:42 AM, Bhaskar, KS wrote:
The way to patch a live CD is to make up a new one.
That was my general implication: I have enough CD-Rs floating around
without having to version them.
I've thought about making up CD's for use on questionable hospital
computers (e.g., for
If you feel like performing a careful review, feel free to add it to
ehr.gplmedicine.org. OSCAR was exculded from my review only in the interests
of time.
-FT
On 5/11/06, James Busser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On May 9, 2006, at 3:24 PM, sickleofzeus wrote:
It is difficult for the average
Alvin B. Marcelo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Any thoughts about that statement? Can we actually call a standard open if there are limitations
to its implementation by FOSS?
No. Unless the limitation is due to the laziness of the FOSS developers ;-)
Nanda Gunaratne
alvin
This is the ideal. But if the differences between the two are substantial, it could be a lot of work. IDC-9 was never made for electronic medical records - just paper. I am not sure if ICD-10 is, but it is more likely to be electronically usable. ICD-10-PCS on the other hand was made
David Forslund [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes. Let us decide which of these nationally decided ones we should support.
Regards
Nanda Gunaratne
It isn't clear to me the role that OSHCA can/should play in the
standards world. It might be useful
for the community to agree on things
Jason Tan Boon Teck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well anything making the work of an evil mind more difficult is worth it :-)
Total security being a myth.
Nanda
On 5/12/06, Franklin M. Siler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On May 11, 2006, at 10:22 PM, Jason Tan Boon Teck wrote:
Title: Proposed New Subcommittee for the OASIS IHC TC
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ihc/200605/msg0.html
SPONSORED LINKS
Software distribution
Salon software
I do *strongly* recommend researching human engineering studies
re determine whether a fine granularity such as is provided by ICD-10,
which may be very accurate from a technical point of view, does, in
practice, provide more accuracy than a lower granularity encoding.
If such a study does not
I agree with Heitzso. ICD-10 suffers from 'usability' issues. Yet unlike the better systems (ie,
SNOMED) it is freely accessible.
Perhaps OSHCA can make a statement making ICD-10 the 'least common denominator' together with the
caveats and recommendations as cited by Heitzso?
--- Heitzso
What would standardizing on ICD-10 mean in the context of an
organization such as OSHCA given the reality the heterogenous landscape
of ICD adoption... what would this mean in real practice? What would
this imply for those systems using ICD - 9 for example? Would it be more
appropriate
Hi,
Here's another opportunity for FOSS advocating NGOs and individuals to
help influence ICT policies for development at a global level. Feel free
to pass this information to anyone interested in promoting FOSS.
http://www.unicttaskforce.org/
Global Alliance for ICT Policy and
Molly Cheah wrote:
There doesn't seem to be control of its use. Information (unofficial) of
its copy rights by WONCA is here
http://www.ulb.ac.be/esp/wicc/copyright-en.html
You can download the electronic version of ICPC2 from here.
http://www.ulb.ac.be/esp/wicc/ceo.html
When we
Molly Cheah wrote:
http://www.apdip.net/news/fossdoc
A two-part documentary, “Code Breakers” will be aired on BBC World TV
starting on 10 May 2006. Code Breakers investigates how poor countries
are using FOSS applications for development, and includes stories and
interviews from around the
20 matches
Mail list logo
