patrick blanchard wrote: > The short list: > I think version control may be useful for Electronic Medical Records > (EMR), and improving patient care by linking Evidenced Based Medicine > (EBM) and Evidence Based Management (EBMgmt). Do you? Thomas Lord wrote:
> My answer is "Yes, but...." > > ...snip... > > The "But" part is that we have a "category problem". Revision control > offers all the great things listed in the previous paragraph, and more, > but.... so does the category "global distributed file system". And, > really, neither of those categories intrinsically begins to address (or > even make a good framework for addressing) the domain-specific data > types we expect in PHRs. > > So, "version control may be useful" but that may not be the most > immediately useful way to look at it. Maybe we want a versioning file > system, for example. And, anyway, the particular nature of the data > has to be discussed. > > Stay tuned. I'm working on defining a new category. > Unless I am missing something, domain-specific data types in medicine are not any different than CMS. Ok, so they might have a different tag, but that's all. I don't think the catagory problem is really a problem after all, unless you want to start storing voxel image in a 3d array. If the data type is kept 2d, then Perl can sort out the minutia, while Arch can do the bird's eye view of data changes. It might work w/ a medical specific markup language similar to HTML. ...just some thoughts. CGI can make it presentable to the enduser. I'll bet what you have already will take this 90% of the way, and surpass 100% of the EMRs on the market.
_______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
