Sorry, still don't get it completely. What do you mean by "use directly in HL7"? Do you refer to HL7 CDA only or to any HL7 message? Could you please provide a little more detail how MOF would help with that.
Thanks. Thilo On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Sam Heard <sam.heard at oceaninformatics.com> wrote: > > No Tilo - it is to enable archetypes and templates to be used directly in > HL7. > Sam > > > > Thilo Schuler wrote: > Sam > > In your opinion what is the advantage of expressing templates in MOF? > Can't the described exersise CCR->openEHR->CDA be done already only > with openEHR/Ocean tools? Is to have a more indepedent intermediary > format? > > Thilo > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 7:46 AM, Sam Heard > <sam.heard at oceaninformatics.com> wrote: > > > Hi Ed > > I am sorry if I sounded disparaging in anyway. I was referring to the > implementation guide which is the basis for various schematron and other > approaches (as I understand it). I am sure that a lot of people will > choose CDA and CCD particularly in the near future. I know you are > interested in the clinical specifications and have formed a clinical > council. I think it would be wonderful to see the European effort line > up with the US effort in the clinical specifications area around the CEN > and hopefully ISO approach. I understand the difficulties. > > A small group of enthusiasts working at a distance has got us to this > point. The openEHR Foundation is planning to move into formal > relationships with a number of agencies and we have the prospect of > alignment of a number of initiatives. I believe a small group working on > AOM -> MOF would be very useful and give a way forward to a single > logical representation of clinical content. Clinicians around the globe > will appreciate this. > > Cheers, Sam > > > > > William E Hammond wrote: > > Thanks for the response. I am not sure I agree that CCD is a paper, but I > > guess time will tell which is the way to go. > > > > Looks like HL7 needs to decide where it fits in today's world and really > > promote that position. I for one think CCD has a lot of promise. > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > Sam Heard > > <sam.heard at oceani > > nformatics.com> To > > Sent by: For openEHR technical discussions > > openehr-technical <openehr-technical at openehr.org> > > -bounces at openehr. cc > > org > > Subject > > Re: AOM MOF mapping > > 04/21/2008 06:41 > > PM > > > > > > Please respond to > > For openEHR > > technical > > discussions > > <openehr-technica > > l at openehr.org> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Ed > > > > The process is really about bringing the clinical specifications into a > > common framework. From the openEHR perspective this involves: > > links to terminology developments to ensure a sustainable approach > > and transformations to a terminology only syntax if that proves > > useful > > links to implementations of these specifications in openEHR, CEN/ISO > > or CDA > > CCD is a paper and XML schema exercise to get CCR and CDA into the same > > semantic space, but there is no coherent approach as each are XML schemas > > and have a lot of attendant paper guides. As openEHR Archetypes are > largely > > independent of any implementation concerns, it is possible to express the > > clinical content of the CCR as a Template entirely in terms of standard > > archetypes. From this, a specific schema (Template Data Schema) can be > > presented which should ideally map 1:1 with the clinical content of CCR. > > This allows integration of CCR into the openEHR space in a controlled > > manner with validation via the TDS. > > > > As we have a growing number of Archetype to CDA transforms this allows > > production of CDA documents from the openEHR environment in a reusable > > manner. The full 'pipeline' of CCR instance -> openEHR -> CDA is > therefore > > possible without intervention and with full standardised clinical content > > validation (as well as any constraints expressed in CCR via the > template). > > openEHR users then have a means of dealing with CCR and CDA documents in > > the same environment (as well as v2 and XML etc) . > > > > If people are ready to accept such transforms as a wonderful thing (or > even > > useful) and we validate the outputs from the CCD perspective (remember it > > is a single transform per archetype so it should then work in any CDA > > document (assuming there is some standardisation in that environment) > then > > it should be possible to get the MOF statement from AOM representation of > > an archetype. This will require some work but it would reduce concerns in > > the market. > > > > By the way, what the pipeline offers to vendors and jurisdictions even as > > it stands is the possibility of building templates (always from > archetypes) > > and creating a template data schema that maps to their own data model. If > > the data validates, then they can transform their data to openEHR and > from > > there to CDA, CCR, v2 etc without understanding any of the complexities. > Of > > course integration engines will perform something similar on a case by > case > > basis. > > > > I hope that is helpful, Sam > > > > > > > > > > > > William E Hammond wrote: > > Sam, > > > > Help me understand this exercise if CCD exists? > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > Sam Heard > > > > <sam.heard at oceani > > > > nformatics.com> > > To > > Sent by: adam.flinton at nhs.net, For > > openEHR > > openehr-technical technical discussions > > > > -bounces at openehr. > > <openehr-technical at openehr.org> > > org > > cc > > > > > > Subject > > 04/19/2008 08:26 Re: AOM MOF mapping > > > > AM > > > > > > > > Please respond to > > > > For openEHR > > > > technical > > > > discussions > > > > <openehr-technica > > > > l at openehr.org> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Adam > > > > This is something we would very much like to do. I would propose the > > following senario: > > 1. Develop a template for CCR > > 2. Document it (html) and enable data entry > > 3. Transform the template to MOF > > 1. Create data against the MOF > > 4. Transform the data entered against the template to CDA > > 5. Compare the data > > This would seem useful as a trial. > > > > Cheers, Sam > > > > Adam Flinton wrote: > > In a reply wrt "On Information and Interoperability" I have > > noted > > that > > there is a move underway to try & produce an HL7 model (via > > EMF/MOF) > > for > > use in our /OHT eclipse tooling. > > > > Has anyone looked at an AOM/MOF mapping? > > > > If so any thoughts? > > > > E.g. were one to want to sit down & do some Eclipse OpenEHR > > tooling > > then > > an obvious contender would be the Eclipse EMF/GMF & that would > > require a > > AOM<>EMF mapping & given EMF is a subset of MOF then ....etc. > > > > Adam > > > > > > ********************************************************************** > > > > > > This message may contain confidential and privileged > > information. > > If you are not the intended recipient please accept our > > apologies. > > Please do not disclose, copy or distribute information in this > > e-mail > > or take any action in reliance on its contents: to do so is > > strictly > > prohibited and may be unlawful. Please inform us that this > > message > > has > > gone astray before deleting it. Thank you for your > > co-operation. > > > > NHSmail is used daily by over 100,000 staff in the NHS. Over a > > million > > messages are sent every day by the system. To find out why > > more > > and > > more NHS personnel are switching to this NHS Connecting for > > Health > > system please visit www.connectingforhealth.nhs.uk/nhsmail > > > > ********************************************************************** > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > openEHR-technical mailing list > > openEHR-technical at openehr.org > > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Dr Sam Heard > > Chief Executive > > Officer > > Ocean Informatics > > > > > > Director, openEHR Foundation > > Senior Visiting Research Fellow, University College London > > Aus: +61 4 1783 8808 > > UK: +44 77 9871 0980 _______________________________________________ > > openEHR-technical mailing list > > openEHR-technical at openehr.org > > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > openEHR-technical mailing list > > openEHR-technical at openehr.org > > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > openEHR-technical mailing list > > openEHR-technical at openehr.org > > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > openEHR-technical mailing list > > openEHR-technical at openehr.org > > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at openehr.org > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical > > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at openehr.org > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical > > > > > > -- > > > > > Dr Sam Heard > Chief Executive Officer > > Director, openEHR Foundation > Senior Visiting Research Fellow, University College London > Aus: +61 4 1783 8808 > UK: +44 77 9871 0980 > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at openehr.org > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical > >
