Dear Molly,
It was very good to meet you in Cape Town. I'm sorry that I was not
able to arrange to attend the OSHCA conference.
This mailing list has been very quiet and I assume that it is because
you are all busy at the conference. I was hoping that those of us who
could not attend would have
The Nokia N770 (or newer N800) are portable WiFi Linux based browser
machines. Screen is 800x480. This would work for a browser based
application.
Palm and PPC each have WiFi/browser models (with smaller screens).
/Mark
--- In openhealth@yahoogroups.com, Will Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
Interesting idea. I can see how people without health insurance would
use this "marketplace" but I don't understand how existing clients who
are locked into a plan would use it.
--- In openhealth@yahoogroups.com, "beancycler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello, I am new to this group. I have
The conference listed in the second Google blog is organized by the
Markle Foundation. These are the same people who are organizing the
Dossia omnimedix effort.
I did some more research and it appears that the Dossia project is all
open source. You can download the software from Regenstrief and
They're a little fuzzy on data standards. They want to focus on
interoperability and advocate for adopting existing standards They
advocate for a "common framework" for data interchange using "any
hardware and software". I would think they would need open standards
and it could be supported b
The copyright covers "expressions of ideas", not the ideas themselves.
You can certainly reference the original "idea" (description) and
create a new "expression". A "derivative work" includes some portion
of the original verbatim and that should be avoided.
The idea of the patient not being abl
an
> "official" CPT code, then reimbursement would be denied by CMS,
> even if you weren't sued by the AMA. If the descriptions didn't
> match the AMA's then they would easily claim it wasn't "official".
>
> Dave
> mspohr wrote:
> >
Yes, your paraphrase is correct and it is an absurd situation.
In the US we have a strong tradition of supporting "free enterprise".
Unfortunately, this has been corrupted to mean "government granted
monopolies to the private sector". This is established through our
"free enterprise" election s
the government for use in medical
billing.
> This issue has already been the subject of litigation.
>
> http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f2000/2076.htm
>
> -FT
>
> On 12/11/06, mspohr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > The codes would be the same as tho
om the payor that they
> would accept those codes for reimbursement. Otherwise this
> effort will be relatively useless.
>
> Dave
> mspohr wrote:
> >
> > The goal of the CPT code project would be to create a version of
> > procedure codes for use in billing i
The goal of the CPT code project would be to create a version of
procedure codes for use in billing in the US that could be freely
distributed.
While it would be nice to fit this into an overarching ontology, this
would introduce overhead which is not warranted. The CPT codes
themselves are a dead
Copyright covers "expressions" of ideas and as such covers the AMA's
descriptions. Theoretically, if you wrote different descriptions,
they would not be covered by the AMA copyright. However, the AMA has
been very aggressive in defending their monopoly on the codes so they
might threaten a commun
The AMA CPT codes have a tortuous history and are currently in a
legally ambiguous place supported by aggressive AMA lawyers. It is
similar to the legally tenuous position of the RIAA that they can
control what you can do with the music you have purchased.
A short history.
In testimony before co
Jason,
I don't think any of the participants are enjoying this conversation.
However, it is not mindless pedantic navel gazing.
We are just trying to have a clear statement from Thomas and Ocean
Informatics on the IP status of their software and archetypes.
Unfortunately, the conversation is go
Thomas,
I think most of us would agree that open health data standards are
very important and I think we all share a great enthusiasm for
promoting and using open standards.
The issue with this prolonged discussion has been that many people are
not clear on the definition of open source software an
wrote:
>
> mspohr wrote:
> > Thomas,
> > We don't want to argue about open source. We just want a clear
> > statement from you.
> >
> > Is your software open source?
> >
> > If yes, then there should be a place where we can download the source
Thomas,
We don't want to argue about open source. We just want a clear
statement from you.
Is your software open source?
If yes, then there should be a place where we can download the source
with a GPL type license.
If no, then this is a proprietary system and you shouldn't make
statements th
Thomas,
Just a word of caution on "I don't want to get into arguments about
Open Source"...
It seems that you are asking for help in testing, debugging, and
developing your software but you aren't willing to make this an open
source project (at this time). Unfortunately, there is a history
(especi
of disasters and forgetful
patients (rare).
/Mark
--- In openhealth@yahoogroups.com, Thomas Beale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> mspohr wrote:
> >
> > Simple open systems and open communications standards have the best
> > chance of success.
> >
I find Dr. Grove's approach interesting. He focuses on the "keep is
simple" (KISS) principle and is rightly worried about huge spending on
unproven information systems. He also proposes the widespread
deployment of simple "walk-in" clinics to lower the cost and improve
access to medical care.
The
20 matches
Mail list logo
