Dear Sam, It is very nice for you to float this as a discussion topic before it is implemented, so that we can engage with you on the requirements/ design aspects in advance.
Since the UML you reference is of the Reference Model, and means much to informaticians but not the other clinicians on this list, I wonder if it will help engage discussion if we collate a list of a few examples of archetype-level participants. As you say, these are specific kinds of participants as opposed to the generic ones of committer, composer, information provider and attester. As a starter, we might wish to discuss these suggestions: anaesthetist for an operation note (COMPOSITION): mode: must be present in person witness for a consent form (COMPOSITION): mode: must be present in person parent/next-of-kin/carer for administration of a drug to a child (ENTRY): mode: must be present or by telephone (not e-mail) information subject to be mandatory for family history kinds of information, and must be a relative (ENTRY): no mode restriction consultant psychiatrist optional/mandatory for a mental health section (COMPOSITION): mode? verifier/witness for a drug administration on the ward (ENTRY), mode: must be present in person Is this the kind of archetype-level participation you had in mind? With best wishes, Dipak ________________________________________________________ Dr Dipak Kalra Clinical Senior Lecturer in Health Informatics CHIME, University College London Holborn Union Building, Highgate Hill, London N19 5LW Phone: +44-20-7288-5966 Fax: +44-20-7288-3322 Web site: http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20070817/e19a2c02/attachment.html>
