Suggestions re Term binding in Archetype Editor
An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20061219/b572aa58/attachment.html> -- next part -- ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
Antw: Re: Suggestions re Term binding in Archetype Editor
In een bericht met de datum 18-12-2006 18:00:54 West-Europa (standaardtijd), schrijft mattias.forss at gmail.com: > Maybe you're right, the definitions could be added as comments, but for > proprietary terminology like SNOMED CT this will mean that these kind of > archetypes can only be distributed to people that have paid the license. Sorry, but Snomed CT cannot be considered a proprietary terminology given the formal international SDO status from January onward. Further, most English speaking countries (Cnd, UK, US, Aus, Nw Zealand) already have a national licence allowing everyone to use it for health purposes. William Goossen -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20061219/1f837976/attachment.html> -- next part -- ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
Antw: Re: Suggestions re Term binding in Archetype Editor
In een bericht met de datum 18-12-2006 20:44:14 West-Europa (standaardtijd), schrijft Thomas.Beale at OceanInformatics.biz: > This is not an unreasonable request - it would not be particularly > difficult to implement in the specs or the tools, if we know what to > implement. We have to be careful with Snomed licensing issues however > when the terminology is snomed... I think there is no reason to be careful if within a realm. Key is to take care where to apply and where not. My earlier comments on binding not only to one terminology but to have mapping tables with synonyms applies here too. William -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20061219/241bf59f/attachment.html> -- next part -- ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
Antw: RE: Suggestions re Term binding in Archetype Editor
In een bericht met de datum 18-12-2006 17:28:53 West-Europa (standaardtijd), schrijft ian at gpacc.co.uk: > Hi Mattias, > > I do appreciate these difficulties but if the definition of the binding > changes the binding itself may be obsolete. I agree the comment idea is less > than > satisfactory, it would be better if the term binding contained the rubric as > well as the term code for exactly the same reasons that the rubric must > always accompany the term code in DV_CODED_TEXT. > > Managing Snomed-CT is going to be a very tricky exercise. Using archetypes + > bindings offers a very powerful way of managing Snomed where semantic > precision is very important e.g. decision support. Having tools that will let > us > design and document these bindings will be a powerful way of persuading those > who have yet to understand the value of the archetype approach. Having the > term rubrics available is an important part of cross-checking that the > correct > binding has been applied, both for the original author (where terminology > services might well be available) and when the archetype and bindings are > reviewed by a wider clinical audience (when such services may not be > available). > Regards, > > Ian > Ian I agree fully with what you say here: there must be a strict binding possible between the information model and the terminology model. It is not only for decision support, but also for confidence that the right base materials are used to develop the archetype and for semantic interoperability. Sometimes terminologies can say the opposite of what the information model expresses. So prevention of errors in interpretation is also important. William Goossen -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20061219/ce275ab7/attachment.html> -- next part -- ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
Antw: Re: Suggestions re Term binding in Archetype Editor
Williamtfgoossen at cs.com schreef: > In een bericht met de datum 18-12-2006 18:00:54 West-Europa > (standaardtijd), schrijft mattias.forss at gmail.com: > > >> Maybe you're right, the definitions could be added as comments, but >> for proprietary terminology like SNOMED CT this will mean that these >> kind of archetypes can only be distributed to people that have paid >> the license. > > > Sorry, but Snomed CT cannot be considered a proprietary terminology > given the formal international SDO status from January onward. > > Further, most English speaking countries (Cnd, UK, US, Aus, Nw > Zealand) already have a national licence allowing everyone to use it > for health purposes. You mean, for free? Paid by the resp. governments? That, I did not know. Bert ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
Antw: Re: Suggestions re Term binding in Archetype Editor
Williamtfgoossen at cs.com wrote: > In een bericht met de datum 18-12-2006 18:00:54 West-Europa (standaardtijd), > schrijft mattias.forss at gmail.com: > > >> Maybe you're right, the definitions could be added as comments, but for >> proprietary terminology like SNOMED CT this will mean that these kind of >> archetypes can only be distributed to people that have paid the license. > > Sorry, but Snomed CT cannot be considered a proprietary terminology given the > formal international SDO status from January onward. > > Further, most English speaking countries (Cnd, UK, US, Aus, Nw Zealand) > already have a national licence allowing everyone to use it for health > purposes. But it is not an *open* system - and this is OpenEHR... ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
Term binding in Archetype Editor: Definitions, Rules, Quality Control
- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20061219/0af95a77/attachment.html> -- next part -- ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
[Norton AntiSpam] Re: Re: Suggestions re Term binding in Archetype Editor
2006/12/19, Williamtfgoossen at cs.com : > > In een bericht met de datum 18-12-2006 18:00:54 West-Europa > (standaardtijd), schrijft mattias.forss at gmail.com: > > > Maybe you're right, the definitions could be added as comments, but for > proprietary terminology like SNOMED CT this will mean that these kind of > archetypes can only be distributed to people that have paid the license. > > > > Sorry, but Snomed CT cannot be considered a proprietary terminology given > the formal international SDO status from January onward. We'll see about that. Read about the issues with SNOMED and LOINC here http://library.ahima.org/xpedio/groups/public/documents/ahima/bok1_032401.html Mattias Further, most English speaking countries (Cnd, UK, US, Aus, Nw Zealand) > already have a national licence allowing everyone to use it for health > purposes. > > William Goossen > ___ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at openehr.org > http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical > > > -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20061219/cc6df49c/attachment.html> -- next part -- ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
Antw: Re: Antw: Re: Suggestions re Term binding in Archetype Editor
In een bericht met de datum 19-12-2006 10:52:14 West-Europa (standaardtijd), schrijft bert.verhees at rosa.nl: > You mean, for free? Paid by the resp. governments? > > That, I did not know. > > Bert Yes, that is what I mean, and Denmark and the Netherlands have agreed to participate. So anyone willing to apply Snomed CT in the Netherlands and many other countries can do so I think in the 2007 area. Currently I am using it for several projects. (to develop 'archetypes', in HL7 v3 template disguise). William -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20061219/99536dfe/attachment.html> -- next part -- ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
Antw: Re: Re: Suggestions re Term binding in Archetype Editor
In een bericht met de datum 19-12-2006 11:28:56 West-Europa (standaardtijd), schrijft mattias.forss at gmail.com: > We'll see about that. Read about the issues with SNOMED and LOINC here > HREF="http://library.ahima.org/xpedio/groups/public/documents/ahima/bok1_032401.html";>http://library.ahima.org/xpedio/groups/public/documents/ahima/bok1_032401.htm > l > > Mattias This is exactly what I mean: Snomed CT moving to an international SDO, and securing funding, governance and working together with WHO to sort out the issues. So I think the propretary comments for SNomed CT no longer holds. It is eventually becoming a sister of OPEN ehr. William -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20061219/ecd31959/attachment.html> -- next part -- ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
Antw: Re: Antw: Re: Suggestions re Term binding in Archetype Editor
Williamtfgoossen at cs.com schreef: > In een bericht met de datum 19-12-2006 10:52:14 West-Europa > (standaardtijd), schrijft bert.verhees at rosa.nl: > > >> You mean, for free? Paid by the resp. governments? >> >> That, I did not know. >> >> Bert > > > Yes, that is what I mean, and Denmark and the Netherlands have agreed > to participate. So anyone willing to apply Snomed CT in the > Netherlands and many other countries can do so I think in the 2007 > area. Currently I am using it for several projects. (to develop > 'archetypes', in HL7 v3 template disguise). Stupid I did not know about this. How do they validate if you come from Country X or Z, or a better question, how can I get access to this materials? Thanks, Bert > > > > William > > > > > ___ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at openehr.org > http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
Suggestions re Term binding in Archetype Editor
An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20061219/acac5d38/attachment.html> -- next part -- ___ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
