International interoperability

Heather Leslie heather.leslie at oceaninformatics.com
Thu Aug 23 04:49:31 EDT 2012


Hi Stefan,

 

The latest NEHTA Pathology Test Result DCM can be found here:
http://dcm.nehta.org.au/ckm/OKM.html#showarchetype_1013.1.839

 

I will be attending MIE, Semantic Health Net meetings and ISO in the next
few weeks, so hope we can catch up and have a chat F2F

 

Regards

 

Heather

 

From: openehr-clinical-bounces at lists.openehr.org
[mailto:openehr-clinical-bounces at lists.openehr.org] On Behalf Of Heath
Frankel
Sent: Thursday, 23 August 2012 8:35 AM
To: For openEHR clinical discussions
Subject: Re: International interoperability

 

Hi Stefan,
Are you aware of the NEHTA Pathology DCMs done in Australia. These should be
close to going into CKM if not already, otherwise you may find in the NEHTA
CKM.
Heath

On 23/08/2012 12:26 AM, "Stefan Sauermann" <sauermann at technikum-wien.at>
wrote:

Agree. 
My preception is that the people in this community share a common vision of
doing this on the openEHR platform, within CKM. That is fine and there is
hope. 

I have the feeling, that the people in this community think in many
different usecases. We seem to be talking about different flavours of
similar things without explicitly stating which flavour is actually meant.
This makes harmonisation very hard.

Would it be reasonable to establish usecases in order to promote more
focussed sub-discussions? 

I am happy to engage in a "pathology report content" use case effort, should
anybody wish to join. 

On behalf of the national EHR effort we are running a group of users and
vendors, so we get heavy, national scale engagement from very high ranking
experts. I also have a contracted team here, supporting and documenting the
discussion into a guideline document. I would have to check with the bosses,
but I guess they might be nudged to agree that we could also capture the
results of our discussion into the tools you suggest (if the effort is
manageable). Austria is using CDA as transport format but that is another
issue.  It does not keep us from a useful technology-independent content
discussion in this community. 

Of course we would need help from others who are more experienced in the
tools and philosophy of archetypes. 

This may also generate some input into the 13606 revision that is on the
move.

So: Volunteers, lets hear from you!

Greetings from Vienna, looking forward, 
Stefan





Stefan Sauermann
 
Program Director
Biomedical Engineering Sciences (Master)
 
University of Applied Sciences Technikum Wien
Hoechstaedtplatz 5, 1200 Vienna, Austria
P: +43 1 333 40 77 - 988 <tel:%2B43%201%20333%2040%2077%20-%20988> 
M: +43 664 6192555 <tel:%2B43%20664%206192555> 
E: stefan.sauermann at technikum-wien.at
 
I: www.technikum-wien.at/mbe
I: www.technikum-wien.at/ibmt
I: www.healthy-interoperability.at


Am 22.08.2012 15:39, schrieb Thomas Beale: 


It takes this community to do that - and people in it to make it grow, and
change it as is needed. If we see the situation like software tools, its
like putting out a new tool that initially only a small community uses
(think GIT in the early days). You have to get it going and show its value,
and then more people will come. And then the next increment will be based on
the thoughts of more users. And so on.

- thomas

On 22/08/2012 02:11, Stefan Sauermann wrote:

Dear Sam, all,
I am fully aware of the openEHR efforts, CKM etc. I agree that these are
platforms are required !!! to get the work done.

My point is that interoperability will only work for users / systems who are
represented in the discussions. Those  who engage and agree on harmonised
solutions will have interoperability. "The rest of the world" are not
represented, they do not discuss. We cannot solve their problems for them.
The "rest of the world" will therefore not have interoperability (with us)
without further work. 

Limiting the scope to a certain user group and a use case will make
harmonisation crisp and easier.  We can focus on solutions for those who are
represented in the discussions and get those going. We can then prove and
disseminate to "the rest of the world" that this works elegantly with little
effort for a certain purpose in a certain community. Our experience in
Austria is that "the rest of the world" will notice and jump on the train.
The train needs to be there before anybody will jump on. 

(I do admit that we do not see the complete "rest of the world" on our
Austrian trains. But there is an audience and there is international
cooperation with relevant groups elsewhere.)

(Online tools are fine. In my experience however harmonisation work is
successful if you have at least a few face to face meetings at the start,
but that is another story, does not belong here.)

 

_______________________________________________
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical at lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org


_______________________________________________
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical at lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20120823/b3205f6c/attachment.html>


More information about the openEHR-clinical mailing list