On Monday, 12 November 2018 15:26:09 AEDT Bernard Robertson-Dunn wrote: > I agree, but myhr isn't the way of the future. All it is is a very bad > document management system with no smarts and huge costs and risks.
It's not even a document-management system as far as I can tell, it's more of a badly designed drop-box. > The problems in healthcare are not about records. I saw an advert for an > international conference recently that was all about clinical medicine of the > future. Not a single mention of medical or health records. > > It's all about better data acquisition, analysis and diagnosis followed by > more targeted treatment, not just symptoms and risk reduction, which is what > most of today's clinical medicine is. MHRecord seems to have been "designed" by a committee with little collective understanding of the current practice of medicine in its various contexts. The fact patient information is held as a collection of PDFs and system security is non-existent suggests there hasn't been any IT&C expertise either. No wonder there's apparently no publicly documented Systems Requirements Specification or System Architecture. However ATO, Centrelink, the police, and others have access to MHRecord. Why? That strongly suggests the real aim is to spy on citizens, and if there's a residual health benefit, it's incidental. Was the system designed by Peter Dutton's office (:-)? Perhaps Labor should try to flush out whatever justification exists for our $1B expenditure, and then we can all see its proposed justification. David L. _______________________________________________ Link mailing list Link@mailman.anu.edu.au http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
