There will likely be a Kylix (sp) version of CPRS in the not too distant future. And there are several examples of web based integration as well, although not for things like imaging and bits that don't work well without some local processing
....all this aside I am quite interested in finding out what people think about the opportunity cost issue On Sat, 2002-08-10 at 13:17, John Gage wrote: > I think the best way to advance VistA is to make it web-based and > make it programmable in Perl. Making it web-based would, I believe, > replace CPRS which I am not sure has come along with the open source > version. > > It would also be nice to install modules piece-meal into a particular > institution. A foot in the door is worth a lot. > > What VistA appears to have is a critical mass of programmers. That > is the thing that has *always* propelled open source. > > >Ok so on one hand we have a system that works, supports 400 hostpitals > >and users like: VistA and on the other the desire to build a future > >proof solution: let's call it Futura (I think Ford had a car by that > >name). The questions (perhaps a tad loaded) I would like to explore are: > > > >1. Is the social opportunity cost of waiting for Futura versus > >implementing VistA globally worth it, ethical? > >2. Is there a way to have your cake and eat it too....i.e. build Futura > >and get the benefits of VistA? > >3. If everyone used VistA would Futura even matter? > > > >The perspective I am taking is the 80/20 approach with global > >improvement in health outcomes being the measure. > > > > > >-- > >Cheers, > > > >Joseph > > > >Joseph Dal Molin > >e-cology corporation > >www.e-cology.ca > > -- Cheers, Joseph Joseph Dal Molin e-cology corporation www.e-cology.ca
