Tag Archives: e-health

DCMs & archetypes – why we need 3 layers

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

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

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

The CDA ‘dual-content’ conundrum

In his recent blog post, Eric Browne highlights what may be a problem in the design of the Australian PCEHR, due to the well-known CDA feature allowing dual forms of content – text and structured, supposedly equivalent – to be … Continue reading

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

CIMI group goes with openEHR archetypes & UML profile

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?

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

Why e-health really is hard

Every so often, someone asks: why can’t the health sector get its act together with ICT? Tell me why health is ‘different’? Every so often a new and interesting answer to this question pops up…

Posted in Health Informatics, Philosophy | Tagged , , | 4 Comments

Information models, DCMs and Archetypes

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?

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

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