Hi Melanie, I will send you a Wave invite. The reason we are interested in using Wave rather than traditional email, wikis or instant messaging, is that it nicely combines all three. We are interested in using a similar approach within some aspects of CKM, particularly a forthcoming more informal area, we currently call the 'Sandbox' where people can collaborate on very early draft archetypes and templates.
Because Wave is still in a testing phase, I appreciate this will limit the numbers who can get involved but after a few weeks new Wavers get their own invites to hand out, so the numbers who have access are starting to grow quite quickly now. I will send you an invite - it might take a wee while to come through. Ian Dr Ian McNicoll office / fax +44(0)141 560 4657 mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859 skype ianmcnicoll ian.mcnicoll at oceaninformatics.com ian at mcmi.co.uk Clinical Analyst Ocean Informatics openEHR Archetype Editorial Group Member BCS Primary Health Care SG Group www.phcsg.org / BCS Health Scotland 2009/11/13 Melanie Spath <melanie.spath at gmail.com> > Ian, > > Haven't used Google Wave myself yet and guess it's still at the > innovator/early adopter stage. But what about starting with something that > people are used to, like normal Internet Messaging? I am available on > melanie.spath at gmail.com on google chat. Otherwise, if people are brave > enough, I'd like a GW invitation also. > > Mel. > > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 5:13 PM, Ian McNicoll < > Ian.McNicoll at oceaninformatics.com> wrote: > >> Ok - here is a suggestion. >> >> Would there be any interest in me setting up a Google Wave to develop the >> content of a possible Radiotherapy archetype? I have just been given a few >> Google Wave invitations to hand out. >> >> This would be something of an experiment to see how well Wave might >> support (or confuse) a collaborative approach to early archetype >> development. >> >> I would be happy to facilitate the process and, for example, draw up an >> initial Mindmap but I would need a bit of help getting started in terms of >> Radiotherapy content. The general idea would be work on the mind map and >> associated wiki until we had enough consensus to develop a draft archetype >> to put up into CKM. >> >> It will obviously need input from people like Kevin who have some >> experience in this area but the intention is just to get the scope and >> general shape of a Radiotherapy archetype(s) outlined so it will not require >> anything like as much rigour (and demand on time) as the formal CKM review >> process. >> >> There is already some interest in the Google Wave community in developing >> eHeath standards and we could perhaps tap into that group to get a few more >> volunteers. It would also be a great way of getting more attention for >> openEHR and the work we are doing in CKM. >> >> For those of you unfamiliar with Google Wave - this is a pretty good intro >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDu2A3WzQpo&feature=player_embedded# >> >> Any takers? Let me know here or directly to >> ian.mcnicoll at oceaninformatics.com >> >> >> Ian >> >> >> Dr Ian McNicoll >> office / fax +44(0)141 560 4657 >> mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859 >> skype ianmcnicoll >> ian.mcnicoll at oceaninformatics.com >> ian at mcmi.co.uk >> >> Clinical Analyst Ocean Informatics openEHR Archetype Editorial Group >> Member BCS Primary Health Care SG Group www.phcsg.org / BCS Health >> Scotland >> >> >> >> 2009/11/11 Ian McNicoll <Ian.McNicoll at oceaninformatics.com> >> >> Hi Melanie, >>> >>> There are a few interesting pieces of work around openEHR and research >>> repositories, including the Sintero project >>> http://www.openehr.org/288-OE.html?branch=1&language=1 >>> >>> This is now starting to get going and you should really have a chat to Ed >>> Conley, the project lead about possible collaboration, particularly around >>> archetype design, so that as far as possible any research derived data is >>> shareable across different research platforms. >>> >>> It is not always easy to decide the best approach for a particular piece >>> of clinical information in terms of separate archetype or specialisation , >>> but once you get a good maximal dataset around a particular concept the >>> choices normally become clearer. >>> This is why we often start the modelling process by looking for existing >>> data models e.g. for Radiotherapy and use Mindmaps to get a good feel for >>> the scope of the concept, well before we begin any formal archetype >>> modelling. >>> >>> At some stage we would like CKM to direct support this early stage of >>> 'informal' modelling using mindmaps and a more conversational. collaborative >>> style of debate between those who are interested in a particular topic. Part >>> of the goal is to encourage people to share ideas at an early stage without >>> feeling under pressure to come up with a publishable solution. By keeping >>> the discussions as public as possible, we avoid the danger of individuals >>> or groups working privately and independently on the same topic, with a >>> resulting clash of ideas and constructs. >>> >>> We are a bit away from providing this in CKM, but Google Wave has some of >>> the approach we might want to look at - mixture of email, chat, wiki + some >>> support for mindmaps. >>> >>> >>> >>> Ian >>> >>> Dr Ian McNicoll >>> office / fax +44(0)141 560 4657 >>> mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859 >>> skype ianmcnicoll >>> ian.mcnicoll at oceaninformatics.com >>> ian at mcmi.co.uk >>> >>> Clinical Analyst Ocean Informatics openEHR Archetype Editorial Group >>> Member BCS Primary Health Care SG Group www.phcsg.org / BCS Health >>> Scotland >>> >>> >>> >>> 2009/11/11 Melanie Spath <melanie.spath at gmail.com> >>> >>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> Thanks for the great advice, it is very helpful. >>>> >>>> I am actually aiming at developing "research" or "omic" archetypes (e.g. >>>> test results from experiments on patient specimen, e.g. from >>>> genomic/proteomic/metabolomic experiments etc.), since my background is in >>>> genetics. The reason for this is to be able to integrate clinical patient >>>> and scientific research data to support biomedical knowledge discovery. In >>>> this, I am collaborating with a prostate cancer bio-resource which collects >>>> specimen from prostate cancer patients. A biobank contains clinical patient >>>> information and the "omic" information. I am planning to use this biobank >>>> as >>>> a test-bed for an "archetyped" biobank information system. >>>> >>>> As a start I was trying to see how much of the clinical content in the >>>> biobank could be modelled with existing archetypes (to avoid duplicate >>>> effort) and to discover "holes". Some of the information could be modelled >>>> with existing archetypes (e.g. results of histopathological analysis with >>>> the openEHR-EHR-CLUSTER.microscopy_prostate_carcinoma.v1 archetype), but >>>> for >>>> others I could not find suitable archetypes (this in itself was not an easy >>>> task, I think there needs to be another discussion on a different >>>> thread/list about the difficulties of matching database fields to existing >>>> archetypes/fields in existing archetypes). I wasn't sure if the >>>> non-existence of archetypes for radio/hormone/chemotherapy was because they >>>> hadn't been developed yet or because it was envisaged that other existing >>>> archetypes could be used to model these (e.g. the INSTRUCTION.medication >>>> and >>>> INSTRUCTION.non_drug_therapy ones). >>>> >>>> Until then, in the presence of these "holes", my approach will be to use >>>> "placeholder" archetypes that hold the minimum needed information for this >>>> specific case e.g. for radio/hormone/chemotherapy as discussed above, until >>>> experts have agreed on their general suitable structure. I am welcoming any >>>> developments in this area. >>>> >>>> Thank you for your help. >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> Melanie. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 1:16 AM, Heather Leslie < >>>> heather.leslie at oceaninformatics.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Melanie, >>>>> >>>>> I see some great comments from Ian and Kevin so far - thanks. >>>>> >>>>> You aren't starting with anything simple ;-) - this is a very >>>>> complicated domain and hopefully you will have access to some oncological >>>>> advice and resources as well. >>>>> >>>>> The Medication archetype is a great starting point. Please be aware >>>>> that we are doing some work at the moment to try to bring the Medication >>>>> family - Instruction, Action and the common description up for >>>>> collaborative >>>>> review in CKM soon. We are trying to harmonise the current archetype with >>>>> many requirements and standards so that we can try to streamline the >>>>> review >>>>> process, but I expect that we will find it to be one of our harder >>>>> archetypes to get agreement on. Keep an eye out, and adopt the archetypes >>>>> if >>>>> you would like to participate in the review when initiated. >>>>> >>>>> Intravenous orders and administration of drugs adds a further degree of >>>>> complexity, and most of your chemo will likely be needing this extra >>>>> functionality. Plus some of these chemo instructions will be complex >>>>> orders, potentially with a number of activities within the one order. Some >>>>> routes may be atypical eg intrathecal etc. >>>>> >>>>> Hormone therapy - hmm trying to remember back... Certainly many will be >>>>> simple oral medication instructions/actions; some will be IV (as above). >>>>> We >>>>> need some expert advice here to determine if there are additional >>>>> requirements for some hormone therapy that exceed these identified use >>>>> cases. >>>>> >>>>> Radiotherapy is a completely separate area, and as Kevin/Ian suggest, >>>>> you need to determine the scope here - potentially it is a whole domain of >>>>> medicine! I would suggest you mindmap your requirements for recording as >>>>> a >>>>> starting point, and from there you should be able to identify the >>>>> potential >>>>> archetypes that need development - it may be more than one >>>>> instruction/action eg related measurements etc requiring recording in an >>>>> Observation archetype. >>>>> >>>>> regards >>>>> >>>>> Heather >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 11/11/2009 2:44 AM, Melanie Spath wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I'm trying to archetype patient records in a prostate cancer >>>>> environment. I see that there are currently no specific archetypes for >>>>> common cancer treatments such as radiotherapy, hormone therapy and >>>>> chemotherapy. Could hormone therapy and chemotherapy be described as >>>>> specializations of the openEHR-EHR-INSTRUCTION.medication.v1 >>>>> archetype? And could radiotherapy be described with a specialization >>>>> of openEHR-EHR-INSTRUCTION.non_ >>>>> drug_therapy.v1? Or should these be >>>>> described in completely new archetypes (e.g. INSTRUCTION.radiotherapy/ >>>>> hormone_therapy/chemotherapy)? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for your help, >>>>> Melanie Spath. >>>>> >>>>> PhD Candidate >>>>> >>>>> Centre for Health Informatics >>>>> School of Computer Science & Statistics >>>>> Trinity College Dublin >>>>> Dublin 2, Ireland >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> openEHR-clinical mailing list >>>>> openEHR-clinical at >>>>> openehr.orghttp://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus >>>>> signature database 4593 (20091110) __________ >>>>> >>>>> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. >>>>> http://www.eset.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> *Dr Heather Leslie* >>>>> MBBS FRACGP FACHI >>>>> Director of Clinical Modelling >>>>> *Ocean Informatics <http://www.oceaninformatics.com/>* >>>>> Phone (Aust) +61 (0)418 966 670 >>>>> Skype - heatherleslie >>>>> Twitter - @omowizard >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> openEHR-clinical mailing list >>>>> openEHR-clinical at openehr.org >>>>> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> openEHR-clinical mailing list >>>> openEHR-clinical at openehr.org >>>> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical >>>> >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> openEHR-clinical mailing list >> openEHR-clinical at openehr.org >> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical >> > > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-clinical mailing list > openEHR-clinical at openehr.org > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20091113/43b837a5/attachment.html>
