difference and relationship between openEHR and EN13606

Thomas Beale thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com
Fri Aug 28 13:17:10 EDT 2015


Hi Bert,

On 28/08/2015 16:32, Bert Verhees wrote:
> On 27-08-15 19:54, Thomas Beale wrote:
>> I would suggest that CIMI has been simiplified to the point of not 
>> being directly usable as an RM by openEHR or 13606 - most of the 
>> needed context information is gone in CIMI, and it doesn't 
>> distinguish any kind of 'Entry' or clinical statement.
>
> Are you saying, that the context information from the reference model 
> is not used?

the CIMI RM 
<https://github.com/opencimi/rm/blob/master/model/Release-3.0.4/BMM/CIMI-RM-3.0.4-generated-from-UML.bmm#>has 
no context information in it.

>
>>
>> This was a conscious choice in the CIMI community, designed to get 
>> buy-in from a much wider range of stakeholders than openEHR or 13606 
>> deals with. Technically, the CIMI approach is to soft-model nearly 
>> everything in 'reference archetypes'.
>
> and the archetypes fill in the missing reference model context parts?

that's the idea.

>
> If so, then this makes the two level modeling approach, of course, 
> much more flexible, a kind of new database approach/technique, usable 
> for virtual anything.

it makes it more flexible in one sense, but also harder for implementers 
- now they cannot know where even basic context like subject, times, 
locations etc are - all that has to be obtained from archetypes. The 
'flexibility' comes with a price...

What goes in any particular RM for some particular domain or industry 
needs to be the result of careful analysis of

  * the need for being able to build reliable software components that
    can assume some things
  * the need for a base model with enough useful primitives that it
    doesn't force endless repeated modelling of the same basic concepts
    in archetypes
  * but sufficient flexibility so that all the variability of the
    domain, and also localization can be accommodated.

It's a balancing act.

So far in openEHR, the context and most other structures etc have proven 
to be good. We'll probably get rid of / simplify the ITEM_TREE stuff in 
Release 1.1, but I can't imagine getting rid of most of the other semantics.

- thomas

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20150829/a9de2bf7/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the openEHR-technical mailing list