> The _apparent_ need (or acceptability) for less precision > in dates as they age is not necessarily true. For example, in retrospective > review of 'causes and effects' (eg a drug trial) time _intervals_ > will be required to be calculatable at optimum precision. > A general principle is, surely, that we can't and should not anticipate the > future use/value of any of the data!
It was my impression that he was speaking of an implementation issue. Not that the actual data should degrade in precision over time. So the presentation to the physician is what is in question here. If that is what users would want/need to see then I have no objection to it. I was merely asking if that was truely a 'need'. Tim - If you have any questions about using this list, please send a message to d.lloyd at openehr.org
