Tag Archives: archetype

DCMs & archetypes – why we need 3 layers

Posted on 09/10/2012 by wolandscat

This post is inspired by a slightly out-of-control discussion among people in the CIMI group. It’s a good discussion. The latest question that has come up is whether a DCM (Detailed Clinical Model) is a ‘model of use’ (i.e. some … Continue reading →

Posted in Computing, Health Informatics, openehr | Tagged , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Models from Intermountain Health – pioneering lessons

Posted on 22/09/2012 by wolandscat

I am back this week from a week in Salt Lake City, visiting Dr Stan Huff’s group at Intermountain Health, a globally recognised centre of excellence for clinical computing. I should have been 10 years ago, but better late than … Continue reading →

Posted in Health Informatics, openehr | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Ontologies in health: ready for prime time? IAO versus openEHR

Posted on 03/09/2012 by wolandscat

A lot of ontology work has been going on for some years that comes loosely under the BFO and OBO activities, which stand to improve how computing in health is done. BFO is the Basic Formal Ontology, and OBO is … Continue reading →

Posted in Health Informatics, openehr, Philosophy | Tagged , , , , , | 3 Comments

CIMI group goes with openEHR archetypes & UML profile

Posted on 14/12/2011 by wolandscat

The Clinical Information Modelling Initiative (CIMI) group led by Dr Stan Huff (Intermountain Health, Utah) met here in London 29 Nov – 1 Dec to make a final decision on formalism, from the two remaining – openEHR archetypes and various … Continue reading →

Posted in Computing, Health Informatics, openehr | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

CIMI: purpose-built or jury-rigged?

Posted on 14/11/2011 by wolandscat

In recent weeks, the Clinical Information Modelling Initiative (CIMI), led by Stan Huff, has followed its stated process and is nearing a voting process in which a shared health domain modelling formalism is chosen. Proponents of each of the candidate … Continue reading →

Posted in Health Informatics, openehr | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

DCM – Data Types and Reference Model considerations

Posted on 11/09/2011 by wolandscat

Following the DCM meeting convened by Dr Stan Huff (Intermountain Healthcare) in Washington in July, reported in an earlier blog post, there is a further meeting this week in San Diego, which will discuss the issues of ‘data types’ and … Continue reading →

Posted in Health Informatics, openehr | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Information models, DCMs and Archetypes

Posted on 07/07/2011 by wolandscat

I will be attending a ‘Fresh Look’ meeting in Washington next week. The idea is to make some progress on the topic of  ‘detailed clinical models’ (DCMs). Some of the goals include setting up a repository of DCMs, establishing governance, … Continue reading →

Posted in Computing, Health Informatics, openehr | Tagged , , , , , | 7 Comments

DCMs – can they look good AND be computable?

Posted on 08/06/2011 by wolandscat

Let’s talk about mindmaps and archetypes. Mindmaps seem to be fuzzy and friendly – we need them because they are incredibly efficient at transmitting information to humans. Archetypes seem über-mathematical, but we need them to do proper model-based computing.

Posted in Computing, Health Informatics, openehr | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

Detailed Clinical Models (DCMs) – some basic facts

Posted on 03/06/2011 by wolandscat

The New Zealand e-health programme architecture task-force has published its Working Interoperability Reference Architecture blueprint document. With respect to the document and the comments posted (I tried to post myself,  but the comment disappeared), it seems worth making a couple … Continue reading →

Posted in Health Informatics, openehr | Tagged , , , , , , | 5 Comments

The crisis in e-health standards II

Posted on 01/10/2009 by wolandscat

Evidence for the inability of SDOs to create a coherent ecosystem of standards for e-health Continue reading →

Posted in Health Informatics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments