Link between goals and other clinical concepts
bert.verhees at rosa.nl
Thu Jun 26 03:33:59 EDT 2014
>> The point is that you don't have to choose if you use generic kernel.
> that's also easy to do with reference models. There are many reference
> models right here
> <https://github.com/openEHR/reference-models/tree/master/models>, to
> plug into a kernel.
Ah, I did not know about this. I am very pleased to see it. It fits in
the kernel-design philosophy I favor.
Thanks for the good work.
I found, that there are still some basic rules to which a Reference
Model must apply. One of the basic structural ideas of the kernel is
that it must be patient/EHR (say Subject)) centric.
Honouring this basic idea avoids having to write Reference
Model-specific base structure code.
>> You can use multiple in archetypes-based reference models to validate
>> and store and query data. You can allow certain parts of an
>> healthcare organization, without any technical provision, to
>> implement new ideas about medical data structures, maybe necessary
>> for specific treatment.
> sure, but like I said, this is just the same problem moved up one
> level. At some point, you still have to write classes with the
> semantics of things like Observation or Composition or whatever.
> Otherwise you can't get the data on the screen, or compute with it in
> any meaningful way.
I think this can be solved with templates and information which can be
in the archetype-meta-data. Don't you agree? What am I missing?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the openEHR-clinical