Hi Heath, Thomas, My experience is that HL7 v3 is an open standard and OpenEHR is proprietary (as owned by the OpenEHR foundation holding the copyrights, albeit I understand that work is underway to sort that out).
William -----Original Message----- From: openehr-technical-boun...@openehr.org [mailto:openehr-technical-bounces at openehr.org] On Behalf Of openehr-technical-request at openehr.org Sent: maandag 20 februari 2012 23:25 To: openehr-technical at openehr.org Subject: openEHR-technical Digest, Vol 67, Issue 34 Send openEHR-technical mailing list submissions to openehr-technical at openehr.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to openehr-technical-request at openehr.org You can reach the person managing the list at openehr-technical-owner at openehr.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of openEHR-technical digest..." Today's Topics: 1. RE: Meaningful Use and Beyond - O'Reilly press - errata (Koray Atalag) 2. RE: openEHR - Persistence of Data (Heath Frankel) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 21:58:33 +0000 From: Koray Atalag <k.ata...@auckland.ac.nz> Subject: RE: Meaningful Use and Beyond - O'Reilly press - errata To: For openEHR technical discussions <openehr-technical at openehr.org> Message-ID: <B1CE708E5C614F4BB990E32CC5F03AD41F690A10 at uxcn10-1.UoA.auckland.ac.nz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hi Fred, Apropos to Tom I'd say openEHR is also equally to do with software maintainability; thanks to the dual or multi-level modelling and model driven development. This is my main research area as well as open source software. I agree with Tom's comments that being open source by itself is not enough (for any software quality aspect I believe) and must be accompanied with open standards. If I was asked to explain openEHR to my mother I'd probably say: 'it is about getting information right in healthcare'. I usually find this statement as the starting point when talking to other audiences such as computer scientists and developers. Perhaps you'll find useful as well. Cheers, -koray From: openehr-technical-boun...@openehr.org [mailto:openehr-technical-bounces at openehr.org] On Behalf Of fred trotter Sent: Saturday, 18 February 2012 1:27 p.m. To: For openEHR technical discussions Subject: Re: Meaningful Use and Beyond - O'Reilly press - errata Thomas, This is quit usable critique and I will certainly draw from it in future revisions of the work. You make the argument that OpenEHR is primarily for interoperability, and I can accept that fundamental argument. It is difficult to swallow however, when I hear the HL7 v3 wonks talking about how HL7 RIM is the solution to semantic interoperability. Are they confused or are you confused, because you are saying basically the same thing. From my perspective as in implementer it looks awefully like a blueray vs HDDVD war and it looks like OpenEHR is losing. But at the same time I keep hearing that HL7 RIM is "compatible" with and might be "merged" with HL7 RIM. Very confusing, and I have yet to see something compelling that can be done in OpenEHR that cannot be done with HL7 RIM. Having said that, HL7 RIM is a proprietary ontology/model and OpenEHR, is not. That gives OpenEHR some usefulness even as an alternative model. Is that where I should see the value? Here is an information model that delivers semantic interoperability but is not proprietary? On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 6:15 AM, Thomas Beale <thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com<mailto:thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com> > wrote: Hi Fred, I think you are missing the point. The key thing we are working on in openEHR is interoperability, not open source. Open source health applications have historically not made any difference to interoperability, intelligent computing or anything else - they are the same as closed source systems that don't do any of these things. This is not to say that they aren't better quality software / solutions in other ways - some are very nice. But in general they have the same proprietary data formats and service interfaces as commercial solutions (making such definitions openly available doesn't change anything). Solving interoperability and intelligence in e-health (as for other domains) is very hard indeed, and solutions based on simple approaches only have marginal benefit. What matters to clinical people and actual health delivery is interoperability, regardless of closed or open source: open standardised (= widely agreed) information models, service interfaces and knowledge formalisms. Of course open source, done the right way does have a lot to offer, and can make the economics better, but it doesn't specifically address the interoperability problem. What I think you will see in the future is intelligent health computing platforms based on openEHR, or something like it (as you noted, Tolven also does not have much penetration today, but it also is a sophisticated solution that takes semantic interoperability seriously). See the CIMI forum<http://informatics.mayo.edu/CIMI/index.php/London_2011> to get some idea of the international backing for knowledge-driven architecture. Without these kind of model-driven architectures, semantic interoperability will remain a dream, as will any serious industry around decision support, business intelligence and data-based medical research, and any other application wanting to use computable patient-centred health data. Because of the time it has taken to mature the openEHR - and other related, and even competing - health computing platforms, solutions based on these platforms are only just starting to make serious inroads. I have no problem with your view of openEHR in terms of limited penetration (today), but what I think would be a little more positive would be for the open source sector to actually take part in solving interoperability, rather than continuing to add to the problem. There are real synergies to be explored. Much of the new work in openEHR and related architectures is coming out open source. It would be great if existing open source health application developers were to get involved - e.g. by working with us and others (e.g. HL7 HSSP, IHE etc) on e-health service models<http://www.openehr.org/wiki/display/spec/openEHR+Service+Model>. We on the other hand have a lot to learn about e-health applications. Finally, I would guess that e-health is about 10% of the way to a truly useful full-featured intelligent and open e-health platform of the future. That means that books like yours should potentially be educating readers on the likely future, not the status quo. - thomas -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/private/openehr-technical/attachments/2 0120220/a393d2ed/attachment-0001.html ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 08:49:34 +1030 From: Heath Frankel <heath.fran...@oceaninformatics.com> Subject: RE: openEHR - Persistence of Data To: For openEHR technical discussions <openehr-technical at openehr.org> Message-ID: <CACOAxbA7mRUQf5Qk1xgoEY4g-v+=RUEE42J+-FECeFOZjjxDQA at mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Hi Koray, Yes there was a honours thesis done on using an object database to store and query openEHR data. It was intended to compare our indexed XML blob approach but from memory it ended up comparing two commercial object databases. I will have to ask Chunlan if the paper is publicly available. Heath. On 20/02/2012 8:54 PM, "Koray Atalag" <k.atalag at auckland.ac.nz> wrote: > I remember a Honours or Master?s thesis on openEHR persistence...I think > Heath was involved. Heath is that publicly available?**** > > ** ** > > Cheers,**** > > ** ** > > -koray**** > > ** ** > > *From:* openehr-technical-bounces at openehr.org [mailto: > openehr-technical-bounces at openehr.org] *On Behalf Of *M?rcio Costa > *Sent:* Saturday, 18 February 2012 10:36 a.m. > *To:* For openEHR technical discussions > *Subject:* Re: openEHR - Persistence of Data**** > > ** ** > > Do Anyone knows about some papers of persistent storing? **** > > ** ** > > att,**** > > > *M?rcio Costa* > B.Sc. in Computer Science @ Cin/UFPE > M.Sc. Candidate in Computer Science @ CIn/UFPE > MSN: mdckoury at gmail.com > > > **** > > Em 17 de fevereiro de 2012 17:59, M?rcio Costa <mdckoury at gmail.com> > escreveu:**** > > i would like to thank everyone for the information and attention. **** > > ** ** > > i'm trying to do a review about this subject to start my research, but i > will do something to analyse the best way to model and persist this kind of > data.**** > > ** ** > > Best Regards,**** > > ** ** > > *M?rcio Costa* > B.Sc. in Computer Science @ Cin/UFPE > M.Sc. Candidate in Computer Science @ CIn/UFPE > MSN: mdckoury at gmail.com > > > **** > > 2012/2/17 pablo pazos <pazospablo at hotmail.com>**** > > Hi Erik, you are right, the uglyness depends on 1. the queries you want to > execute and 2. the programmer background.**** > > ** ** > > For 1. the "common" queries like get all records for this patient in this > time window, are not that ugly, but more complex queries could be.**** > > For 2. for a XML guy, writing xPath based queries is ok, but for a SQL is > a pain in the a55. > > :D > > I'm hoping to see that paper on AQL->xQuery soon!**** > > ** ** > > I totally agree that inside the system maybe you don't need a complete RM > structure to handle data instances, but for the service layer (sharing > information with other systems) this is a must.**** > > > > -- > Kind regards, > Ing. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez > LinkedIn: http://uy.linkedin.com/in/pablopazosgutierrez > Blog: http://informatica-medica.blogspot.com/ > Twitter: http://twitter.com/ppazos**** > > > Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 16:21:29 +0100 > > Subject: Re: openEHR - Persistence of Data > > From: erik.sundvall at liu.se > > To: openehr-technical at openehr.org**** > > > > > > Hi! > > > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 23:26, pablo pazos <pazospablo at hotmail.com> > wrote: > > > Other models I didn't try yet are Object Oriented DBs and > > > Document Oriented DBs (XML, JSON, ...) [6]. I think DODBs > > > are a good option, fast for store highly hierarchical structures, > > > but you need to write some ugly queries if you want your data back :D > > > > Not necessarily that ugly... we curently auto-convert AQL to XQuery > > and execute towards an XML database. Those queries are very readable. > > > > Then the question is what kind of client system you are aiming at. For > > some use cases you don't really need to map things back to > > openEHR-RM-objects, in web browser based GUIs for example you can keep > > treating the data as documents, document fragments, fragment lists > > etc. and use DOM manipulations, jQuery or similar approaches for most > > data manipulation needs. > > > > Good luck with your work M?rcio and please keep us informed! > > > > Best regards, > > Erik Sundvall > > erik.sundvall at liu.se http://www.imt.liu.se/~erisu/ Tel: +46-13-286733 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus > signature database 6898 (20120220) __________**** > > ** ** > > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.**** > > ** ** > > http://www.eset.com**** > > > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus > signature database 6898 (20120220) __________ > > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. > > http://www.eset.com > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at openehr.org > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/private/openehr-technical/attachments/2 0120221/10b0ee3a/attachment.html ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical End of openEHR-technical Digest, Vol 67, Issue 34 *************************************************
