Re: [openhealth] Mirth Project: FOSS HL7 interoperability.

2006-03-24 Thread Stefano Canepa
2006/3/23, Ignacio Valdes [EMAIL PROTECTED]: The goal of the http://www.mirthproject.org/ Mirth Project is to develop an open source cross-platform HL7 interface engine that enables bi-directional sending of HL7 messages between systems and applications over multiple transports. By

Re: [openhealth] Demonstrations Standards.

2006-03-24 Thread Thomas Beale
David Forslund wrote: I think there is an intermediate position here. In my experience these standards, far from perfect, are good enough to gain experience and see them work in practice. The resulting models and infrastructure are actually rather easy to change into new paradigms, I

[openhealth] Re: Demonstrations Standards.

2006-03-24 Thread Wayne Wilson
This continues to be a good discussion. I highlighted some small snippets of previous replys because I think they get at two of the other significant factors involved in uptake of systems. Business models Clinical care models (My perspective is limited to the USA). Whatever else we might

Re: [openhealth] CCHIT biased towards proprietary software??

2006-03-24 Thread syd
The current CCHIT pricing module seems biased against any GPL based system. Joseph has already written about this, but I would like for us to consider group action in the issue. The first issue is pricing. It will cost a $25,000 to $35,000 one-time fee to perform the test. After

Re: [openhealth] CCHIT biased towards proprietary software??

2006-03-24 Thread Joseph Dal Molin
This is a US initiative... [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The current CCHIT pricing module seems biased against any GPL based system. Joseph has already written about this, but I would like for us to consider group action in the issue. The first issue is pricing. It will cost

Re: [openhealth] CCHIT biased towards proprietary software??

2006-03-24 Thread Greg Woodhouse
[I hope you don't mind if I copy this to Hardhats. I think it is a topic of interest to both communities.] I have mixed feelings here. It seems completely reasonable to want to have an accreditation/certification process for health information systems (though the jurisdiction issue is certainly a

Re: [openhealth] CCHIT biased towards proprietary software??

2006-03-24 Thread Fred Trotter
You are right we should not receive a by we do need to make concrete suggestions as to how the same organization can accomplish open source evaluations... Here are the suggestions from emrupdate.com emrupdate 1. Markedly decrease your up-front fees and eliminate the percent royalties

Re: [openhealth] [Fwd: Re: [n-gaa] Is Open Source Good for Innovation?]

2006-03-24 Thread Tim.Churches
Thomas Beale wrote: Tim.Churches wrote: Why Wikipedia doesn't have one is a mystery to me. Why it is as good as it is (however good you think it is) is also a mystery. It is wrong to think of wikipedia as an open source/open content project. In fact, it is about 1 million

Re: [openhealth] [Fwd: Re: [n-gaa] Is Open Source Good for Innovation?]

2006-03-24 Thread Richard Schilling
The evolving work-social phenomena are sure interesting. Toyota, and agriculture research adopting the approach is pretty cool. I believe there are a LOT of companies incorporating open source work into RFPs and proposals to get a contract without even talking to the original developers - this

Re: [openhealth] Demonstrations Standards.

2006-03-24 Thread Richard Schilling
Can anyone post the link again to the files section? Thanks! Richard Will Ross wrote: oops. now i posted the document in the openhealth files section. [wr] - - - - - - - - On Mar 23, 2006, at 8:01 PM, David Forslund wrote: As you probably noticed, images (and attachments) are

Re: [openhealth] CCHIT biased towards proprietary software??

2006-03-24 Thread Richard Schilling
I'd prefer to assume that the CCHIT pricing model is simply biased toward software companies that can produce a viable product. And by that I mean a software product that stimulates revenue for a company at some point - which in our case is not through the sale of software licenses. Nothing

Re: [openhealth] CCHIT biased towards proprietary software??

2006-03-24 Thread Richard Schilling
Rod Roark wrote: This is equivalent to ignoring the practical issues that Fred raised. I disagree. The practical issues Fred raised are real concerns, but the software companies we're competing against throw a *lot* of money into validation and certification - especially HIPAA compliance (in

Re: [openhealth] CCHIT biased towards proprietary software??

2006-03-24 Thread Tim.Churches
Fred Trotter wrote: The current CCHIT pricing module seems biased against any GPL based system. Fred, you don't think that the CCHIT pricing is biased against software released under other types of free, open source licenses? Joseph has already written about this, but I would like for us to

workflow diagram Re: [openhealth] Demonstrations Standards.

2006-03-24 Thread Richard Schilling
Nice work flow diagram. One of the more difficult things I've encountered in 10+ years of health care software development is documenting the work flow. The hallmark of a good clinic hospital seems to be the ability to adjust the work flow to meet the need. There's the work flow the system