Hi folks, recently found this article by Blobel and Goossen:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1386505613002013 Here are some quotes that I found interesting: "[openEHR Archteypes] they are facing the problem that the architectural representation and composition/decomposition of real-world classes and instances cannot be provided appropriately" "Nonetheless, their [(openEHR and CIMI)] architectural basis is insufficient" "What is driving the development seems to be more competition and the defense of market shares than a sophisticated methodology" "The demonstrated substantial weaknesses caused by ignoring the rediscovered systems approach to the domains of discourse and the resulting needs for architecturally sound and ontology-driven modeling approaches are inherent in most of the health informatics standardization efforts intended to go beyond the traditional health information systems? perspective toward a comprehensive reflection of the business domain" I would love to hear some thoughts about the statements and the paper. Best, -- *Birger Haarbrandt, M.Sc.* Peter L. Reichertz Institut f?r Medizinische Informatik Technische Universit?t Braunschweig und Medizinische Hochschule Hannover M?hlenpfordtstra?e 23 D-38106 Braunschweig T +49 (0)531 391-2129 F +49 (0)531 391-9502 birger.haarbrandt at plri.de http://www.plri.de -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20150220/1ad83fe8/attachment.html>
