http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2007/05/07/bisb0507.htm
Expensive - by UK standards - if they don't take the adverts.
I suspect that the licencing model is such that when the company folds,
the software goes away, or alternative and likely more expensive ways of
supporting what by then will be
If;
1) the **patients** have a choice in what information is used about them
2) and there is a guaranteed standard way to retrieve all of their data
if desired
Then I have no issue with this model.
I do have serious concerns about the sanity of the doctors trusting
their patient records to a
I'd just like to say that following this thread on the PCDOM
application is a wonderful case-study for this particular fly on the
wall.
I recall the heated internal discussions about these kind of issues
with the Mirth Project and searching for thoughtful unbiased advice.
We did work
Dr. Cheah,
There is something very disturbing about this thread.
Unless I missed a post, you are being silent on the core issue. The
issue of how certifications will work with FOSS licenses is
interesting and critical to our success. However, Tim Cooks core
question has gone unanswered.
I have thought that for this reason, I should recommending the new
Affero GPL for FOSS ehr software. There is also the issue of ensuring
access to current data, and I am not sure that this can be addressed
via a licensing agreement.
-FT
On Nov 15, 2007 9:33 AM, Joseph Dal Molin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
