Dear Sam, Excludes and Includes, open/closed might serve most requirements. We do need certain rules as well, e.g. can we set a slot which "excludes all".
Like Gerard and Koray had mentioned, I agree to have a way to categorise the archetypes. That would make the includes and excludes lots easier. I guess an ontology might play a role here. Regards, Chunlan Sam Heard wrote: > Dear All (apologies for cross posting) > > I have been discussing the slot assertions off line and want to make > sure the clinical requirements in this space are understood by the > clinical guys. At the moment the Ocean tools work on the same basis as > the Apache url include and exclude statements but I won't go into that. > > My view on the slots is that they have to be open by default (ie let > other archetypes in) as the archetype is an absolute rule which cannot > be broken. If we close slots in the usual case then people who > specialise archetypes and make new ones will have to negotiate the > slot authors in other archetypes. This means that the include > statements are generally guidelines and help people compose sensible > information structures. > > We do, however, want to close some archetype slots - I will give two > examples: > > SECTION: Vital Signs > > It is clear that vital signs section should only contain a limited set > of observations - although this might change over many years with the > introduction of Oxygen sats for example. Even then, perhaps a > specialisation of the archetype is better - or a new one. So here the > slot may allow temperature, pulse, blood pressure, respirations and O2 > sats. > > So we may need to say here that no other archetypes are allowed. > > CLUSTER: Symptom > The proposed symptom cluster has a cluster for associated symptoms - > and these can only be symptom cluster archetypes. This seems sensible. > > There are many examples where we will not want to limit the > inclusions, such as the O: heading in SECTION: SOAP where almost any > observation might be required, though we might have the most usually > used archetypes specifically included (in the archetype or the > template). I do not believe that we will know at design time all the > suitable archetypes for a slot - but we might know many that are > definitely suitable. > > BUT, we do need to say when one or more archetypes is not suitable - > and we need to say when the set is closed (ie no more). > > What do others think about the requirements for slots? > > Cheers, Sam > > > -- > > > Dr. Sam Heard > MBBS, FRACGP, MRCGP, DRCOG, FACHI > > CEO and Clinical Director > Ocean Informatics Pty. Ltd. > <http://www.oceaninformatics.biz/>Adjunct Professor, Health > Informatics, Central Queensland University > Senior Visiting Research Fellow, CHIME, University College London > Chair, Standards Australia, EHR Working Group (IT14-9-2) > /Ph: +61 (0)4 1783 8808/ > /Fx: +61 (0)8 8948 0215/ > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >openEHR-clinical mailing list >openEHR-clinical at openehr.org >http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20070222/58d3d7af/attachment.html> -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ openEHR-clinical mailing list openEHR-clinical at openehr.org http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical
