Hi Dr. Yu,
My answers are inline:
Seung Jong Yu wrote:
> Dear Koray Atalag
>
> First of all, "Yu" is my surname. You're right ! ^^; (most korean's
> name is composed of 2~3 characters and last one is surname)
Good guess ;)
>
> I looked MST as you wrote and I thought I may be able to translate
> MST document into Korean but which will be beyond my scope because MST
> is a official document. However if possible, I can try to contact my
> national endoscopy association and collaborate.
Yes I highly recommend that you contact the gastrointestinal endoscopy
association in your country. Keep in mind that each language translation
is performed by a panel of experts and discussed. And most terms are
highly specific for GPs or other speciality doctors to be able to
translate to the current/commonly used term. Also keep in mind that,
after all the great effort and resulting high quality terminology
system, it is underused. I guess the industry did not fully appreciated
the power of it.
>
> And according to your email, I think you want to make endoscopic
> archetype using MST (MST archetype). If it is right, because one of
> the reasons we intend to use archetype is reusability, I think that
> you will consider most MST archetypes as "Entry" level for diseases &
> normal.
I fully agree. Yes all of the archetypes are indeed subtypes of the
ENTRY type.
>
> And because endoscopy is used for Observation, Diagnosis and Therapy,
> archetypes will be divided into "Observation entry" and "Action entry".
Yes for the Observation. However the diagnosis would be an EVALUATION
archetype. The therapy (plus diagnostic procedures) will better be
modeled by ad hoc ACTION archetypes (No INSTRUCTION type). You can check
the schematic representation of the whole MST model in my thesis
document on page 135 (You can find it under publications=>archetypes
section of openEHR Website). Just ignore the INTERVENTION and use ACTION
instead (an error).
>
> However because there are various endoscopies, e.g. EGD, Colonoscopy
> and ERCP, I think these will be "Section".
> In summary, if you make MST archetypes("Observation Entry" or "Action
> Entry" level) and these are used in "Section"s (EGD, Colonoscopy,
> ERCP, etc.), it will be satisfy reusability.
Well, the structure of the MST model has been a hot debate during my
thesis. We discussed it many times with the experts and could not reach
a clear result. My proposal is to assemble all different archetypes
representing different parts of MST under a single COMPOSITION. This
would be useful for a report generator software (which most of the
implementations of MST are indeed this kind including mine). The
SECTIONS perhaps would form different parts of the EHR such as LAB
results, Progress Notes, Physical Exams and so on.
>
> Lastly, I totally agree that clinical information model is made
> through clinical domain knowledge and I will support your efforts.
Thanks for your kind remarks :) I will remain to support and work on
MST. I believe it is a golden opportunity for HIS developers to get used
to the 'new approach' as most part of an HIS can be modeled by
archetypes and the result will be clear to be seen by all.
Koray Atalag, MD, Ph.D
