Apologies for forgetting to address William Goossen in the mail below. It appears I've deleted a little bit too much from the original message.
Best Regards S On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 9:55 PM, Seref Arikan < serefarikan at kurumsalteknoloji.com> wrote: > Greetings, > I am interested in the details of some of the statements below. We've been > working on generic methods of electronic healthcare standards implementation > at CHIME. We have different teams focusing on different standards, and > developing common tools and methods is an attractive goal for us. So your > comments may provide us some interesting cases to work on. Please see > comments/questions below > > In my experiences HL7 matches up to 98% of ability to represent clinical >> concepts and behavior and OpenEHR archetypes have several limits, making it >> maximum of 50% of representing clinical concept characteristics. >> > Could you please provide an example where openEHR displays some or ideally > more of the several limits you mention? I am interested in hearing about > clinical concepts which are easily modelled in HL7 and hard to model in > openEHR. > >> >> In particular in OpenEHR it is too hard to have relationships with coding >> systems, e.g. Snomed CT (HL7 code attribute and OID systems is almost >> perfect and widely implemented for this), I have seen no proper archetype >> allowing to do the same. >> > Could you please tell why do you find the term/terminology binding > mechanics of archetypes too hard? Again, do you have an example of a > clinical model which is easily bound to Snomed CT in HL7 and is problematic > in openEHR? > > >> It is difficult to express relationships between data elements in >> archetypes, e.g. which data elements are organized in what structure with >> each other (such as the HL7 component relationship) and e.g. define the >> algorithm to create a sum score (such as the HL7 attribute of derivation >> method). >> > I must be missing something here, but there are multiple views of > Archetypes, from trees in GUI to even mindmaps, (to me) quite clearly > displaying the structure. Again, could you provide me a link to an HL7 > example which makes use of the relationship you find hard to express in > openEHR? > > The option to model workflow or behaviour of concepts (e.g. the HL7 mood >> code for an observation) has no equivalent in OpenEHR archetypes. >> > Again, do you have an example where INSTRUCTION, ACTION and ACTIVITY fail > to deliver what you want to do? Could you kindly provide a clinical use > case? > >> >> > Your mail is interesting for me at a personal level too, since I've always > seen people having different approaches to the problem, and discussion is > mostly around the efficiency or elegance of achieving the goal. You clearly > point towards cases where you have observed failure, and I'd really like to > hear specifics of these. > > Best Regards > Seref > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20101211/d2152467/attachment.html>
