Re: Choosing appropriate composition archetypes for recording smoking and drinking summary

[Dileep V S]

Thanks Ian for sharing the details. We can use it as a reference in the
future.

regards
Dileep V S
*Founder*
HealtheLife Ventures LLP
m: +91 9632888113
a: 106, Innovation Centre, IIIT, Electronics City, Bangalore 560100
w: ehr.network, ayushehr.com
 e: dil...@healthelife.in


On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:00 PM Ian McNicoll  wrote:

> Ultimately this is going to be about the context if use, and what you are
> trying to do. Smoking history will be asked in many different places and in
> many potentially different applications.
>
> If you are working with a single app, then the lifestyle_factors
> composition is probably the sensible place as a default but in a multi-app
> platform environment, you may want people to be able to ask about smoking
> status in the context of a condition or disease pathway composition.
> Ultimately it is really about your wish/ability to maintain a single source
> of truth about smoking status
>
> Here is an approach we took for a coProduced Patient Health Record
>
> https://ckm.apperta.org/ckm/templates/1051.57.165/orgchart
>
> all of the templates are here
>
> https://ckm.apperta.org/ckm/#showProject=1051.61.34
>
> and the underlying document is at https://apperta.org/coPHR/
>
> but we took a different approach for a condition focussed pathway document
> on Acute coronary syndrome - the key thing is that the archetype is
> identical in both cases.
>
> Knitt
>
>
>   Dr Ian McNicoll
> mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859
> office +44 (0)1536 414994
> skype: ianmcnicoll
> email: i...@freshehr.com
> twitter: @ianmcnicoll
>
>
>
> Director, freshEHR Clinical Informatics Ltd.
> CCIO inidus Ltd. i...@inidus.com
> Co-Chair, openEHR Foundation ian.mcnic...@openehr.org
> Hon. Senior Research Associate, CHIME, UCL
>
>
> On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 at 14:32, Thomas Beale 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi Dileep,
>>
>> it would be interesting if you could publish anything about your virtual
>> folder design, because more is being added to the RM to standardise how
>> FOLDERs are used to represent episodes, mainly based on how DIPS (Norway)
>> and Code24 (NL) do it. See SPECRM-55 and SPECRM-56
>> .
>> THis is certainly not complete, and indeed we have not yet published a
>> guide for how to use Folders to do this (there probably is not yet full
>> agreement anyway). Nevertheless, both these vendors have sophisticated
>> approaches to using FOLDERs for episodes, and it would be good to have any
>> other ideas to add to the mix so that we could either standardise a single
>> approach, or else describe a small number of extant approaches such that
>> client software can figure out what kind of episode representation it is
>> dealing with.
>>
>> ANother thing, just for reference: from a formal point of view, what gets
>> committed due to an encounter is always be a Contribution, i.e. an openEHR
>> change set (thinking in DVCS, e.g. Git terms). A Contribution can contain
>> any / all of:
>>
>>- completely new TLO(s)
>>- new version(s) of any existing TLO(s)
>>- change(s) to any existing TLO(s)
>>- logical deletion(s) of any TLO(s)
>>- changes to path structure of any TLO with such a structure (=
>>directory)
>>
>> Here, TLO = 'top-level object', which can be the following from the EHR
>> model
>> 
>> :
>>
>>- COMPOSITION
>>- directory, consisting of FOLDERs
>>- EHR_STATUS
>>- EHR_ACCESS
>>
>> And from the Demographic model
>> :
>>
>>- PARTY
>>- PARTY_RELATIONSHIP
>>
>> ANd from the Task Planning model
>> 
>> :
>>
>>- COMPOSITION containing WORK_PLAN or TASK_PLAN
>>
>> It is of course very common that the result of an encounter is just one
>> new COMPOSITION, or one new version of one existing COMPOSITION - but just
>> as with Git or any other versioning system, this requires a Contribution
>> since it is still a change set.
>>
>> Full versioning semantics here
>> ,
>> for reference.
>>
>> - thomas
>>
>>
>> On 05/06/2019 12:15, Dileep V S wrote:
>>
>> Dear Gerard,
>>
>> Thanks for your response. Your point of a composition being designed to
>> record a complete encounter is worth another discussion.
>>
>> I personally feel that it is one way of implementing your CDR, but there
>> could be other equally effective approaches that work better in other
>> situations. For example in the CDR service component of our platform
>> (EHR.Network), we have gone with generic reusable templates such as
>> complaints, diagnosis, medication summary, medication order etc. The
>> application can compose the complete 

Re: Choosing appropriate composition archetypes for recording smoking and drinking summary

[Dileep V S]

Dear Thomas,
We have made a document for internal use. Will polish it over the weekend
and share it with you.

Regards

On Wed 19 Jun, 2019, 7:03 PM Thomas Beale,  wrote:

>
> Hi Dileep,
>
> it would be interesting if you could publish anything about your virtual
> folder design, because more is being added to the RM to standardise how
> FOLDERs are used to represent episodes, mainly based on how DIPS (Norway)
> and Code24 (NL) do it. See SPECRM-55 and SPECRM-56
> .
> THis is certainly not complete, and indeed we have not yet published a
> guide for how to use Folders to do this (there probably is not yet full
> agreement anyway). Nevertheless, both these vendors have sophisticated
> approaches to using FOLDERs for episodes, and it would be good to have any
> other ideas to add to the mix so that we could either standardise a single
> approach, or else describe a small number of extant approaches such that
> client software can figure out what kind of episode representation it is
> dealing with.
>
> ANother thing, just for reference: from a formal point of view, what gets
> committed due to an encounter is always be a Contribution, i.e. an openEHR
> change set (thinking in DVCS, e.g. Git terms). A Contribution can contain
> any / all of:
>
>- completely new TLO(s)
>- new version(s) of any existing TLO(s)
>- change(s) to any existing TLO(s)
>- logical deletion(s) of any TLO(s)
>- changes to path structure of any TLO with such a structure (=
>directory)
>
> Here, TLO = 'top-level object', which can be the following from the EHR
> model
> 
> :
>
>- COMPOSITION
>- directory, consisting of FOLDERs
>- EHR_STATUS
>- EHR_ACCESS
>
> And from the Demographic model
> :
>
>- PARTY
>- PARTY_RELATIONSHIP
>
> ANd from the Task Planning model
> 
> :
>
>- COMPOSITION containing WORK_PLAN or TASK_PLAN
>
> It is of course very common that the result of an encounter is just one
> new COMPOSITION, or one new version of one existing COMPOSITION - but just
> as with Git or any other versioning system, this requires a Contribution
> since it is still a change set.
>
> Full versioning semantics here
> ,
> for reference.
>
> - thomas
>
>
> On 05/06/2019 12:15, Dileep V S wrote:
>
> Dear Gerard,
>
> Thanks for your response. Your point of a composition being designed to
> record a complete encounter is worth another discussion.
>
> I personally feel that it is one way of implementing your CDR, but there
> could be other equally effective approaches that work better in other
> situations. For example in the CDR service component of our platform
> (EHR.Network), we have gone with generic reusable templates such as
> complaints, diagnosis, medication summary, medication order etc. The
> application can compose the complete schema for different encounter/event
> use cases using a combination of these generic templates. The data gathered
> in any event is grouped together under episodes and events using the
> virtual folder service.
>
> This approach ensures the generic nature of the platform, while
> maintaining it's extensibility over time. It also helps us contain the
> proliferation of templates and keeps our library of commonly used stored
> queries to a manageable level.
>
> May be there are other better approaches than either of these that are
> already being used by others. I feel the approach to choose will depend
> upon the requirements and so maintaining flexibility for the implementer
> will be crucial.
>
>
> ___
> openEHR-clinical mailing list
> openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org
>
> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org
>
___
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org

Re: Choosing appropriate composition archetypes for recording smoking and drinking summary

[Ian McNicoll]

Ultimately this is going to be about the context if use, and what you are
trying to do. Smoking history will be asked in many different places and in
many potentially different applications.

If you are working with a single app, then the lifestyle_factors
composition is probably the sensible place as a default but in a multi-app
platform environment, you may want people to be able to ask about smoking
status in the context of a condition or disease pathway composition.
Ultimately it is really about your wish/ability to maintain a single source
of truth about smoking status

Here is an approach we took for a coProduced Patient Health Record

https://ckm.apperta.org/ckm/templates/1051.57.165/orgchart

all of the templates are here

https://ckm.apperta.org/ckm/#showProject=1051.61.34

and the underlying document is at https://apperta.org/coPHR/

but we took a different approach for a condition focussed pathway document
on Acute coronary syndrome - the key thing is that the archetype is
identical in both cases.

Knitt


  Dr Ian McNicoll
mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859
office +44 (0)1536 414994
skype: ianmcnicoll
email: i...@freshehr.com
twitter: @ianmcnicoll



Director, freshEHR Clinical Informatics Ltd.
CCIO inidus Ltd. i...@inidus.com
Co-Chair, openEHR Foundation ian.mcnic...@openehr.org
Hon. Senior Research Associate, CHIME, UCL


On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 at 14:32, Thomas Beale  wrote:

>
> Hi Dileep,
>
> it would be interesting if you could publish anything about your virtual
> folder design, because more is being added to the RM to standardise how
> FOLDERs are used to represent episodes, mainly based on how DIPS (Norway)
> and Code24 (NL) do it. See SPECRM-55 and SPECRM-56
> .
> THis is certainly not complete, and indeed we have not yet published a
> guide for how to use Folders to do this (there probably is not yet full
> agreement anyway). Nevertheless, both these vendors have sophisticated
> approaches to using FOLDERs for episodes, and it would be good to have any
> other ideas to add to the mix so that we could either standardise a single
> approach, or else describe a small number of extant approaches such that
> client software can figure out what kind of episode representation it is
> dealing with.
>
> ANother thing, just for reference: from a formal point of view, what gets
> committed due to an encounter is always be a Contribution, i.e. an openEHR
> change set (thinking in DVCS, e.g. Git terms). A Contribution can contain
> any / all of:
>
>- completely new TLO(s)
>- new version(s) of any existing TLO(s)
>- change(s) to any existing TLO(s)
>- logical deletion(s) of any TLO(s)
>- changes to path structure of any TLO with such a structure (=
>directory)
>
> Here, TLO = 'top-level object', which can be the following from the EHR
> model
> 
> :
>
>- COMPOSITION
>- directory, consisting of FOLDERs
>- EHR_STATUS
>- EHR_ACCESS
>
> And from the Demographic model
> :
>
>- PARTY
>- PARTY_RELATIONSHIP
>
> ANd from the Task Planning model
> 
> :
>
>- COMPOSITION containing WORK_PLAN or TASK_PLAN
>
> It is of course very common that the result of an encounter is just one
> new COMPOSITION, or one new version of one existing COMPOSITION - but just
> as with Git or any other versioning system, this requires a Contribution
> since it is still a change set.
>
> Full versioning semantics here
> ,
> for reference.
>
> - thomas
>
>
> On 05/06/2019 12:15, Dileep V S wrote:
>
> Dear Gerard,
>
> Thanks for your response. Your point of a composition being designed to
> record a complete encounter is worth another discussion.
>
> I personally feel that it is one way of implementing your CDR, but there
> could be other equally effective approaches that work better in other
> situations. For example in the CDR service component of our platform
> (EHR.Network), we have gone with generic reusable templates such as
> complaints, diagnosis, medication summary, medication order etc. The
> application can compose the complete schema for different encounter/event
> use cases using a combination of these generic templates. The data gathered
> in any event is grouped together under episodes and events using the
> virtual folder service.
>
> This approach ensures the generic nature of the platform, while
> maintaining it's extensibility over time. It also helps us contain the
> proliferation of templates and keeps our library of commonly used stored
> queries to a manageable level.
>
> May be there are other better approaches than either of these that are
> already being 

Re: Choosing appropriate composition archetypes for recording smoking and drinking summary

[Thomas Beale]

Hi Dileep,

it would be interesting if you could publish anything about your virtual 
folder design, because more is being added to the RM to standardise how 
FOLDERs are used to represent episodes, mainly based on how DIPS 
(Norway) and Code24 (NL) do it. See SPECRM-55 and SPECRM-56 
. 
THis is certainly not complete, and indeed we have not yet published a 
guide for how to use Folders to do this (there probably is not yet full 
agreement anyway). Nevertheless, both these vendors have sophisticated 
approaches to using FOLDERs for episodes, and it would be good to have 
any other ideas to add to the mix so that we could either standardise a 
single approach, or else describe a small number of extant approaches 
such that client software can figure out what kind of episode 
representation it is dealing with.


ANother thing, just for reference: from a formal point of view, what 
gets committed due to an encounter is always be a Contribution, i.e. an 
openEHR change set (thinking in DVCS, e.g. Git terms). A Contribution 
can contain any / all of:


 * completely new TLO(s)
 * new version(s) of any existing TLO(s)
 * change(s) to any existing TLO(s)
 * logical deletion(s) of any TLO(s)
 * changes to path structure of any TLO with such a structure (= directory)

Here, TLO = 'top-level object', which can be the following from the EHR 
model 
:


 * COMPOSITION
 * directory, consisting of FOLDERs
 * EHR_STATUS
 * EHR_ACCESS

And from the Demographic model 
:


 * PARTY
 * PARTY_RELATIONSHIP

ANd from the Task Planning model 
:


 * COMPOSITION containing WORK_PLAN or TASK_PLAN

It is of course very common that the result of an encounter is just one 
new COMPOSITION, or one new version of one existing COMPOSITION - but 
just as with Git or any other versioning system, this requires a 
Contribution since it is still a change set.


Full versioning semantics here 
, 
for reference.


- thomas


On 05/06/2019 12:15, Dileep V S wrote:

Dear Gerard,

Thanks for your response. Your point of a composition being designed 
to record a complete encounter is worth another discussion.


I personally feel that it is one way of implementing your CDR, but 
there could be other equally effective approaches that work better in 
other situations. For example in the CDR service component of our 
platform (EHR.Network), we have gone with generic reusable templates 
such as complaints, diagnosis, medication summary, medication order 
etc. The application can compose the complete schema for different 
encounter/event use cases using a combination of these generic 
templates. The data gathered in any event is grouped together under 
episodes and events using the virtual folder service.


This approach ensures the generic nature of the platform, while 
maintaining it's extensibility over time. It also helps us contain the 
proliferation of templates and keeps our library of commonly used 
stored queries to a manageable level.


May be there are other better approaches than either of these that are 
already being used by others. I feel the approach to choose will 
depend upon the requirements and so maintaining flexibility for the 
implementer will be crucial.




___
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org

Re: Choosing appropriate composition archetypes for recording smoking and drinking summary

[GF]

Dear Enviado,

Look at the metadata at the Composition level and you know what its purpose is.
This is the text describing the OpenEHR COMPOSITION
 A Composition is considered the unit of modification of the record, the unit 
of transmission in record extracts, and the unit of attestation by authorising 
clinicians. In this latter sense, it may be considered equivalent to a signed 
document.

Gerard   Freriks
+31 620 34 70 88
‭+31 182 22 59 46‬
  gf...@luna.nl

Kattensingel  20
2801 CA Gouda
the Netherlands

> On 5 Jun 2019, at 20:17, Jussara macedo  wrote:
> 
> I would call my contribution as a question to the bones, end to name what we 
> call skeletons in the closet or elephants in the room.
> I was attracted to openEhR in last century when attending a HL7 WGM in 2007 
> in San Diego. By that time I was so convinced that CDA would solve my 
> problems. Then I met Sam Heard and that meeting changed my whole picture.
> Since that I am a fiercely openEHR advocate.
> When talking about documents though, there are too many standards to describe 
> them, and I really hate waste of time calling differents names for the same 
> thing. Snomed ct has a hierarchy describing records artifacts, why don’t we 
> simply adopt them?
> Hope we can have a discussion on convergence and harmonization. I am all ears 
> to listen to other’s opinion
> 
> Jussara Rötzsch
> Enviado do meu iPhone
> 
> Em 5 de jun de 2019, à(s) 12:15, Dileep V S  > escreveu:
> 
>> Dear Gerard,
>> 
>> Thanks for your response. Your point of a composition being designed to 
>> record a complete encounter is worth another discussion. 
>> 
>> I personally feel that it is one way of implementing your CDR, but there 
>> could be other equally effective approaches that work better in other 
>> situations. For example in the CDR service component of our platform 
>> (EHR.Network), we have gone with generic reusable templates such as 
>> complaints, diagnosis, medication summary, medication order etc. The 
>> application can compose the complete schema for different encounter/event 
>> use cases using a combination of these generic templates. The data gathered 
>> in any event is grouped together under episodes and events using the virtual 
>> folder service.
>> 
>> This approach ensures the generic nature of the platform, while maintaining 
>> it's extensibility over time. It also helps us contain the proliferation of 
>> templates and keeps our library of commonly used stored queries to a 
>> manageable level.
>> 
>> May be there are other better approaches than either of these that are 
>> already being used by others. I feel the approach to choose will depend upon 
>> the requirements and so maintaining flexibility for the implementer will be 
>> crucial.
>> 
>> regards
>> 
>> Dileep V S
>> Founder
>> HealtheLife Ventures LLP
>> m:   +91 9632888113
>> a:   106, Innovation Centre, IIIT, Electronics City, Bangalore 560100
>> w:ehr.network,  ayushehr.com 
>>    e: dil...@healthelife.in 
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 5:04 PM GF mailto:gf...@luna.nl>> 
>> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Afaik.
>> Composition is to document one complete encounter.
>> 
>> I use the ENTRY to start documenting the Documentation process.
>> And CLUSTERS to deal with Pannels with Clinical Statements.
>> 
>> 
>> Gerard   Freriks
>> +31 620 34 70 88
>> ‭+31 182 22 59 46‬
>>   gf...@luna.nl 
>> 
>> Kattensingel  20
>> 2801 CA Gouda
>> the Netherlands
>> 
>>> On 4 Jun 2019, at 06:25, Dileep V S >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> What would be the composition archetype recommended for a template to 
>>> record summaries such as Smoking & drinking? The best that I could think of 
>>> is the encounter composition. Do let me know if any other is better suited.
>>> 
>>> On a related note, are there any rules or best practices in choosing the 
>>> appropriate composition archetype to use for building templates? Are we 
>>> planning to have more composition archetypes such as Medication list & 
>>> problem list for use with all kinds of different templates?
>>> 
>>> regards
>> 
>> ___
>> openEHR-clinical mailing list
>> openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org 
>> 
>> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org 
>> 
>> ___
>> openEHR-clinical mailing list
>> openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org 
>> 
>> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org 
>> 
> ___
> openEHR-clinical mailing 

Re: Choosing appropriate composition archetypes for recording smoking and drinking summary

[Jussara macedo]

I would call my contribution as a question to the bones, end to name what we 
call skeletons in the closet or elephants in the room.
I was attracted to openEhR in last century when attending a HL7 WGM in 2007 in 
San Diego. By that time I was so convinced that CDA would solve my problems. 
Then I met Sam Heard and that meeting changed my whole picture.
Since that I am a fiercely openEHR advocate.
When talking about documents though, there are too many standards to describe 
them, and I really hate waste of time calling differents names for the same 
thing. Snomed ct has a hierarchy describing records artifacts, why don’t we 
simply adopt them?
Hope we can have a discussion on convergence and harmonization. I am all ears 
to listen to other’s opinion

Jussara Rötzsch
Enviado do meu iPhone

Em 5 de jun de 2019, à(s) 12:15, Dileep V S  escreveu:

> Dear Gerard,
> 
> Thanks for your response. Your point of a composition being designed to 
> record a complete encounter is worth another discussion. 
> 
> I personally feel that it is one way of implementing your CDR, but there 
> could be other equally effective approaches that work better in other 
> situations. For example in the CDR service component of our platform 
> (EHR.Network), we have gone with generic reusable templates such as 
> complaints, diagnosis, medication summary, medication order etc. The 
> application can compose the complete schema for different encounter/event use 
> cases using a combination of these generic templates. The data gathered in 
> any event is grouped together under episodes and events using the virtual 
> folder service.
> 
> This approach ensures the generic nature of the platform, while maintaining 
> it's extensibility over time. It also helps us contain the proliferation of 
> templates and keeps our library of commonly used stored queries to a 
> manageable level.
> 
> May be there are other better approaches than either of these that are 
> already being used by others. I feel the approach to choose will depend upon 
> the requirements and so maintaining flexibility for the implementer will be 
> crucial.
> 
> regards
> 
> Dileep V S
> Founder
> HealtheLife Ventures LLP
> m:+91 9632888113
> a:106, Innovation Centre, IIIT, Electronics City, Bangalore 560100
> w:ehr.network, ayushehr.com  e: dil...@healthelife.in
> 
> 
>> On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 5:04 PM GF  wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Afaik.
>> Composition is to document one complete encounter.
>> 
>> I use the ENTRY to start documenting the Documentation process.
>> And CLUSTERS to deal with Pannels with Clinical Statements.
>> 
>> 
>> Gerard   Freriks
>> +31 620 34 70 88
>> ‭+31 182 22 59 46‬
>>   gf...@luna.nl
>> 
>> Kattensingel  20
>> 2801 CA Gouda
>> the Netherlands
>> 
>>> On 4 Jun 2019, at 06:25, Dileep V S  wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> What would be the composition archetype recommended for a template to 
>>> record summaries such as Smoking & drinking? The best that I could think of 
>>> is the encounter composition. Do let me know if any other is better suited.
>>> 
>>> On a related note, are there any rules or best practices in choosing the 
>>> appropriate composition archetype to use for building templates? Are we 
>>> planning to have more composition archetypes such as Medication list & 
>>> problem list for use with all kinds of different templates?
>>> 
>>> regards
>> 
>> ___
>> openEHR-clinical mailing list
>> openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org
>> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org
> ___
> openEHR-clinical mailing list
> openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org
> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org
___
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org

Re: Choosing appropriate composition archetypes for recording smoking and drinking summary

[Dileep V S]

Dear Gerard,

Thanks for your response. Your point of a composition being designed to
record a complete encounter is worth another discussion.

I personally feel that it is one way of implementing your CDR, but there
could be other equally effective approaches that work better in other
situations. For example in the CDR service component of our platform
(EHR.Network), we have gone with generic reusable templates such as
complaints, diagnosis, medication summary, medication order etc. The
application can compose the complete schema for different encounter/event
use cases using a combination of these generic templates. The data gathered
in any event is grouped together under episodes and events using the
virtual folder service.

This approach ensures the generic nature of the platform, while maintaining
it's extensibility over time. It also helps us contain the proliferation of
templates and keeps our library of commonly used stored queries to a
manageable level.

May be there are other better approaches than either of these that are
already being used by others. I feel the approach to choose will depend
upon the requirements and so maintaining flexibility for the implementer
will be crucial.

regards
Dileep V S
*Founder*
HealtheLife Ventures LLP
m: +91 9632888113
a: 106, Innovation Centre, IIIT, Electronics City, Bangalore 560100
w: ehr.network, ayushehr.com
 e: dil...@healthelife.in


On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 5:04 PM GF  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Afaik.
> Composition is to document one complete encounter.
>
> I use the ENTRY to start documenting the Documentation process.
> And CLUSTERS to deal with Pannels with Clinical Statements.
>
>
> Gerard   Freriks
> +31 620 34 70 88
> ‭+31 182 22 59 46‬
>   gf...@luna.nl
>
> Kattensingel  20
> 2801 CA Gouda
> the Netherlands
>
> On 4 Jun 2019, at 06:25, Dileep V S  wrote:
>
>
> What would be the composition archetype recommended for a template to
> record summaries such as Smoking & drinking? The best that I could think of
> is the encounter composition. Do let me know if any other is better suited.
>
> On a related note, are there any rules or best practices in choosing the
> appropriate composition archetype to use for building templates? Are we
> planning to have more composition archetypes such as Medication list &
> problem list for use with all kinds of different templates?
>
> regards
>
>
> ___
> openEHR-clinical mailing list
> openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org
>
> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org
>
___
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org

Re: Choosing appropriate composition archetypes for recording smoking and drinking summary

[Dileep V S]

Thanks Leslie,

Do you feel Health summary(
https://ckm.openehr.org/ckm/archetypes/1013.1.1969)  will be appropriate
for things like menstrual summary?

regards
Dileep V S
*Founder*
HealtheLife Ventures LLP
m: +91 9632888113
a: 106, Innovation Centre, IIIT, Electronics City, Bangalore 560100
w: ehr.network, ayushehr.com
 e: dil...@healthelife.in


On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 3:13 PM Heather Leslie <
heather.les...@atomicainformatics.com> wrote:

> Hi Dileep,
>
>
>
> The Lifestyle factors COMPOSITION is the one that has been built to carry
> smoking and alcohol data, plus other lifestyle related data such as
> physical exercise, nutrition etc – see
> https://ckm.openehr.org/ckm/archetypes/1013.1.1648
>
>
>
> The intent for COMPOSITION design is to build ones that will support
> querying for the broad types of clinical data that we store. For example,
> Report has been specialised for a couple of extremely commonly used type of
> reports but I would not advise building one for every type of report,
> rather query on the Report COMPOSITION plus relevant ENTRY archetypes.
>
>
>
> This is not a precise science but we are trying to be pragmatic – to
> balance the reuse of generic archetypes with clear and safe querying.
>
>
>
> Hope this helps
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> Hetehr
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* openEHR-clinical  *On
> Behalf Of *Dileep V S
> *Sent:* Tuesday, 4 June 2019 6:25 AM
> *To:* For openEHR clinical discussions  >
> *Subject:* Choosing appropriate composition archetypes for recording
> smoking and drinking summary
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> What would be the composition archetype recommended for a template to
> record summaries such as Smoking & drinking? The best that I could think of
> is the encounter composition. Do let me know if any other is better suited.
>
>
>
> On a related note, are there any rules or best practices in choosing the
> appropriate composition archetype to use for building templates? Are we
> planning to have more composition archetypes such as Medication list &
> problem list for use with all kinds of different templates?
>
>
>
> regards
>
> Dileep V S
>
> *Founder*
>
> *HealtheLife Ventures LLP*
>
> m:
>
> +91 9632888113
>
> a:
>
> 106, Innovation Centre, IIIT, Electronics City, Bangalore 560100
>
> w:
>
> ehr.network, ayushehr.com  e: dil...@healthelife.in
>
>
> ___
> openEHR-clinical mailing list
> openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org
>
> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org
>
___
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org

RE: Choosing appropriate composition archetypes for recording smoking and drinking summary

[Heather Leslie]

Hi Dileep,

The Lifestyle factors COMPOSITION is the one that has been built to carry 
smoking and alcohol data, plus other lifestyle related data such as physical 
exercise, nutrition etc – see https://ckm.openehr.org/ckm/archetypes/1013.1.1648

The intent for COMPOSITION design is to build ones that will support querying 
for the broad types of clinical data that we store. For example, Report has 
been specialised for a couple of extremely commonly used type of reports but I 
would not advise building one for every type of report, rather query on the 
Report COMPOSITION plus relevant ENTRY archetypes.

This is not a precise science but we are trying to be pragmatic – to balance 
the reuse of generic archetypes with clear and safe querying.

Hope this helps

Regards

Hetehr


From: openEHR-clinical  On Behalf 
Of Dileep V S
Sent: Tuesday, 4 June 2019 6:25 AM
To: For openEHR clinical discussions 
Subject: Choosing appropriate composition archetypes for recording smoking and 
drinking summary

Hi,

What would be the composition archetype recommended for a template to record 
summaries such as Smoking & drinking? The best that I could think of is the 
encounter composition. Do let me know if any other is better suited.

On a related note, are there any rules or best practices in choosing the 
appropriate composition archetype to use for building templates? Are we 
planning to have more composition archetypes such as Medication list & problem 
list for use with all kinds of different templates?

regards
[https://drive.google.com/uc?id=0BxQc41y9yqs6bkE5a1JQQVBjZG8]
Dileep V S
Founder
HealtheLife Ventures LLP
m:
+91 9632888113
a:
106, Innovation Centre, IIIT, Electronics City, Bangalore 560100
w:
ehr.network,  ayushehr.com  e: 
dil...@healthelife.in

___
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org

Re: Choosing appropriate composition archetypes for recording smoking and drinking summary

[GF]

Hi,

Afaik.
Composition is to document one complete encounter.

I use the ENTRY to start documenting the Documentation process.
And CLUSTERS to deal with Pannels with Clinical Statements.


Gerard   Freriks
+31 620 34 70 88
‭+31 182 22 59 46‬
  gf...@luna.nl

Kattensingel  20
2801 CA Gouda
the Netherlands

> On 4 Jun 2019, at 06:25, Dileep V S  wrote:
> 
> 
> What would be the composition archetype recommended for a template to record 
> summaries such as Smoking & drinking? The best that I could think of is the 
> encounter composition. Do let me know if any other is better suited.
> 
> On a related note, are there any rules or best practices in choosing the 
> appropriate composition archetype to use for building templates? Are we 
> planning to have more composition archetypes such as Medication list & 
> problem list for use with all kinds of different templates?
> 
> regards

___
openEHR-clinical mailing list
openEHR-clinical@lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org