In een bericht met de datum 23-1-2007 16:36:41 West-Europa (standaardtijd), schrijft rong.acode at gmail.com:
> On 1/23/07, Thomas Beale <<A HREF="mailto:Thomas.Beale at > oceaninformatics.biz">Thomas.Beale at oceaninformatics.biz</A>> wrote: > >> Sebastian Garde wrote: >> >>> OJS is for example used by the open-access electronic Journal of Health >>> Informatics (eJHI, <A HREF="http://www.ejhi.net/";>http://www.ejhi.net</A>) >>> with quite good experiences. >>> >>> However, one problem you don't tackle with this is the problem that a >>> thorough peer-review process takes quite a bit of time, even if subsequent >>> publishing after acceptance can be faster than with conventional journals. >>> >>> My personal view is that both ad-hoc (email discussion lists, wikis etc) >>> and peer-reviewed content in journals (preferably, but not necessarily >>> open-access) are needed. >>> >>> >> in my view, the huge problem not tackled by peer review processes is that >> it is a paper process - it is human beings considering arguments put down on >> paper. That's not how we validate engineering or medical practice in the >> real world. A bunch of learned reviewers in my view won't find out if >> something >> works or is viable by reading paper. >> >> - thomas >> > > Actually a peer-reviewed online Journal called BioMed Center - Medical > Informatics and Decision Making requires that software used in the paper to > be > openly accessible, aka open source, to the readers so that the described > approach can be reproduced. Having access to the software would make it > easier to > make assessment for the reviewers. > > Regards, > Rong > > The basic principle in medical informatics has been described by Jan van Bemmel a couple of decades ago. I paraphrase this a little: Key is that all information management in medicine begins by human beings (e.g. the patient) and ends by human beings (the clinician interpreting the data to make it information). All in between is just technology suffering from signal distortions and software errors. My own view is that errors are so fundamentally human, that it is inevetable that any software / computer system will inherit the errors, and if we apply this in medical practice, there will be the inevitable mistakes. What we can do is reduce the errors by rigorous testing of all stages of development, starting with defining the clinical content carefully. William -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20070123/85fee02e/attachment.html> -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ openEHR-clinical mailing list openEHR-clinical at openehr.org http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical
