Yet another OBSERVATION vs. EVALUATION issue
gfrer at luna.nl
Tue Aug 14 07:12:08 EDT 2012
In our book any risk assessment is an Evaluation.
Because it is a statement about an inference about characteristics of a possible ongoing process inside the patient system.
And not a state in a process that can be observed via our senses at a point in time.
E.g. The measured/observed systolic blood pressure is a state of a cardio-vascular process inside the patient system.
The measurement of the systolic blood pressure is an Action type archetype.
Both the blood pressure Action and Observation are linked and each have a state model attached to it.
An inference about a process inside the patient system is modelled using the Evaluation pattern.
We can not observe a process in principle, only states at a point in time when we perceive observables and record the observation.
Evaluation is about inferences about characteristics in general of the process and risk is one of the characteristics we can attach to that process and make inferences about.
gfrer at luna.nl
On 14 Aug 2012, at 06:28, Koray Atalag wrote:
> There's a CVD risk assessment tool I’m working on which prepopulates clinical info from GP software. This includes diagnoses, smoking status and checklist for certain medications. Note that some of the underlying info might be coming from previous visits (e.g. problem list type) but also can be newly entered as a result of GP’s assessment. Now, regardless of what happens in GP software, when it is transferred onto this tool (whether automatically prepopulating and/or manual entry) are these Observations or Evaluations? Note that the GP does not make any further clinical judgement here, just rephrase existing data for a different purpose. My gut feeling is the former (Observation).
> I know this is tricky and has been brought to this list many times here but thoughts? Masters?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the openEHR-clinical