Yet another OBSERVATION vs. EVALUATION issue
Karsten.Hilbert at gmx.net
Sun Aug 19 07:42:22 EDT 2012
On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 07:10:32AM +0200, Gerard Freriks wrote:
> It must be clear that one is able to define these terms.
> But others do the same and do it differently.
> 1- an observable as percieved and communicated by a patient
> 2- an observable fact about the patient (system)
> 3- an observable fact about the patient system deemed relevant by a healthcare provider
> 4- the prototypical phenomenon that can be observed and belongs to a set of possible phenomena caused by a particular disease
> These are paraphrased definitions hat I remember.
> So what to do?
> All 4 are defined but not the same.
I agree. I would think the unifying properties would be
- (considered-to-be-)*singular* "thing" (fact, phenomenon, ...)
- about the patient (system)
- deemed relevant in care for said patient at said moment
> This is why CEN/ISO Concepts for Continuity of Care defines many of the terms we need in healthcare.
I'll have a look.
GPG key ID E4071346 @ gpg-keyserver.de
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD 4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346
More information about the openEHR-clinical