> There may be opportunities ahead.
I am optimistic too ;-)
Joseph
Adrian Midgley wrote:
> Joseph Dal Molin wrote:
>> I totally agree with Tim... the pure ASP model is an accident
>> waiting to happen...I would not want to put a patient's life in the
>> hands of a network provider.
>>
>
Joseph Dal Molin wrote:
>
> I totally agree with Tim... the pure ASP model is an accident
> waiting to happen...I would not want to put a patient's life in the
> hands of a network provider.
>
It is NHS policy. (In the UK)
I'm not disagreeing, you understand, not necessarily.
Just rem
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]
> access to current data, and I am not sure that this can be addressed
> via a licensing agreement.
That''s why we have standards :-)
Fred Trotter wrote:
> 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
I totally agree with Tim... the pure ASP model is an accident
waiting to happen...I would not want to put a patient's life in the
hands of a network provider. Hurricane Katrina is a good exampleand
the recent network failure in California in the VA system is another
example (which BTW t
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 s
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 a