Please note that some of the content in the release 1.0 candidate has not yet been approved by the ARB; it may therefore change slightly before reaching its final version. Some of it is still under active development. We recommend to implementers particularly to review the changes to the EHR, Data Structures, ADL and AOM; all of which can be reached from the first link above.
Release 1.0 is expected to be finalised sometime in the next three months; a firm date will be announced soon.
When dreaming about future Medical ICT systems with decision assistance on
the fly (Star Trek Syle!) I had the idea of including some PUBMED
pointers/references (PMID) directly inside archetypes. The reason is simple;
the simplest decision assistance (by the way my thesis advisor has warned me
that this is the new buzzword replacing Decision Support :)) is providing
users with recent and relevant publised papers about a particular
subject...I am not even mentioning about guidelines and Evidence Based
Medicine (EBM) repositories...Since in the past (and for most of the so
called scientific community still valid) papers published in
indexed/refereed journals were the ultimate sources of knowledge, this might
be extremely useful for context dependent and seamless linking of clinical
information systems which makes use of these archetypes to good-and-old
knowledge sources. This I believe is also an important step in making EBM
reality...
What I propose is to create another optional section in ADL documents like
ONTOLOGY and put this information; probably in addition to PMIDs, other
metadata like original language of the paper, MEDLINE style information
about publishment such as names of authors, title, year and etc.
This is the kind of functionality which I am planning to incorporate in
future versions of my endoscopic information system as part of my Ph.D.
work...Right now I can indirectly achieve this functionality by
incorporating UMLS CIDs which are internally linked with MESH keywords used
for indexing of all biomedical papers and doing a lot of querries to UMLS
Knowledge Sources...
This approach might attract more interest from the scientific community onto
openEHR work and maybe increase the quality of archetypes...And probably
more industries like publishing will provide support in us...
When dreaming about future Medical ICT systems with decision assistance on
the fly (Star Trek Syle!) I had the idea of including some PUBMED
pointers/references (PMID) directly inside archetypes. The reason is simple;
the simplest decision assistance (by the way my thesis advisor has warned me
that this is the new buzzword replacing Decision Support :)) is providing
users with recent and relevant publised papers about a particular
subject...I am not even mentioning about guidelines and Evidence Based
Medicine (EBM) repositories...Since in the past (and for most of the so
called scientific community still valid) papers published in
indexed/refereed journals were the ultimate sources of knowledge, this might
be extremely useful for context dependent and seamless linking of clinical
information systems which makes use of these archetypes to good-and-old
knowledge sources. This I believe is also an important step in making EBM
reality...
What I propose is to create another optional section in ADL documents like
ONTOLOGY and put this information; probably in addition to PMIDs, other
metadata like original language of the paper, MEDLINE style information
about publishment such as names of authors, title, year and etc.
This is the kind of functionality which I am planning to incorporate in
future versions of my endoscopic information system as part of my Ph.D.
work...Right now I can indirectly achieve this functionality by
incorporating UMLS CIDs which are internally linked with MESH keywords used
for indexing of all biomedical papers and doing a lot of querries to UMLS
Knowledge Sources...
This approach might attract more interest from the scientific community onto
openEHR work and maybe increase the quality of archetypes...And probably
more industries like publishing will provide support in us...
Any comments???
-koray
-
If you have any questions about using this list,
please send a message to d.lloyd@openehr.org
Dear Koray,
I'm working with some thing like this but I'm including references to
publications in the instances, no in the archetypes. I think that an
archetype is some thing generic, a concept, to include links to bibliography
can be interesting in some cases, for example if you are modelling a
clinical guideline with and archetype or some thing like this. But for the
idea of Evidence Based Medicine I think that is more interesting to include
it in particular instances, in a particular case, especially crossing
concepts implied in this case, this is the work we are developing in this
moment. For this we are including annotations with the links to publications
of interest inside the information no inside the archetypes.
I think both are correct. The protocol on the openEHR entry is made for such things and already a number of archetypes have links - these will be very useful for patients and others - relating a document to a particular problem the person has (instance).
It is also clear that the Bartel index is a generic archetype and has its own associated literature. For this reason we are recording the source of such information structures and also bibliographic references. We are doing this in the repository rather than in the archetype (to manage scale!).
So I think these both have their place!
Cheers, Sam
Isabel Román wrote:
Dear Koray,
I'm working with some thing like this but I'm including references to
publications in the instances, no in the archetypes. I think that an
archetype is some thing generic, a concept, to include links to bibliography
can be interesting in some cases, for example if you are modelling a
clinical guideline with and archetype or some thing like this. But for the
idea of Evidence Based Medicine I think that is more interesting to include
it in particular instances, in a particular case, especially crossing
concepts implied in this case, this is the work we are developing in this
moment. For this we are including annotations with the links to publications
of interest inside the information no inside the archetypes.
Regards
Isabel Román
From: "Koray Atalag" [<atalagk@yahoo.com>](mailto:atalagk@yahoo.com)
To: [<openehr-technical@openehr.org>](mailto:openehr-technical@openehr.org)
Cc: [<openehr-clinical@openehr.org>](mailto:openehr-clinical@openehr.org)
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 12:12 AM
Subject: Inclusion of bibliographic references into Archetypes
Dear All,
When dreaming about future Medical ICT systems with decision assistance on
the fly (Star Trek Syle!) I had the idea of including some PUBMED
pointers/references (PMID) directly inside archetypes. The reason is
simple;
the simplest decision assistance (by the way my thesis advisor has warned
me
that this is the new buzzword replacing Decision Support :)) is providing
users with recent and relevant publised papers about a particular
subject...I am not even mentioning about guidelines and Evidence Based
Medicine (EBM) repositories...Since in the past (and for most of the so
called scientific community still valid) papers published in
indexed/refereed journals were the ultimate sources of knowledge, this
might
be extremely useful for context dependent and seamless linking of clinical
information systems which makes use of these archetypes to good-and-old
knowledge sources. This I believe is also an important step in making EBM
reality...
What I propose is to create another optional section in ADL documents like
ONTOLOGY and put this information; probably in addition to PMIDs, other
metadata like original language of the paper, MEDLINE style information
about publishment such as names of authors, title, year and etc.
This is the kind of functionality which I am planning to incorporate in
future versions of my endoscopic information system as part of my Ph.D.
work...Right now I can indirectly achieve this functionality by
incorporating UMLS CIDs which are internally linked with MESH keywords
used
for indexing of all biomedical papers and doing a lot of querries to UMLS
Knowledge Sources...
This approach might attract more interest from the scientific community
onto
openEHR work and maybe increase the quality of archetypes...And probably
more industries like publishing will provide support in us...
Any comments???
-koray
-
If you have any questions about using this list,
please send a message to [d.lloyd@openehr.org](mailto:d.lloyd@openehr.org)
-
If you have any questions about using this list,
please send a message to [d.lloyd@openehr.org](mailto:d.lloyd@openehr.org)
If you have any questions about using this list, please send a message to d.lloyd@openehr.org
I think both are correct. The protocol on the openEHR entry is made for such things and already a number of archetypes have links - these will be very useful for patients and others - relating a document to a particular problem the person has (instance).
It is also clear that the Bartel index is a generic archetype and has its own associated literature. For this reason we are recording the source of such information structures and also bibliographic references. We are doing this in the repository rather than in the archetype (to manage scale!).
So I think these both have their place!
Cheers, Sam
By the way, URI is now a primitive type in ADL. You can have an http:// ref wherever you want it.
But when I examine I see that the keyword [medline] is used...Is it possible
to use any keyword or they will be fixed in the ADL/AOM?? If it is going to
be fixed, then correct keyword should be [PMID] (I guess stands for PubMed
ID) as this is the unique index number to the paper including the ones that
can be accessed using medline....
I also agree with rest of you that only this reference be included in the
archetype; other details can be associated with individual instances...
It is good that URIs can be used anywhere in the archetype as needed...I
have a requirement to display original MST copyright information in any
written or computable system where it is embedded...So it might ve useful to
include an URI to the original copyright message in MST-Colon and other
archtypes...
I am sure, this reference and other references will be very useful for other
functions; like including CME or med school course references so that med
students or other users may be able to access directly to the educational
resource. It is now becoming popular in many med schools and teaching
hospitals to give limited/read-only HIS access to students so that they can
examine and follow-up patient care in live setting...
In een bericht met de datum 1-11-2005 4:03:18 West-Europa (standaardtijd), schrijft sam.heard@oceaninformatics.biz:
I agree with Sam: the archetype / template should contain the core elements e.g. if Barthel index the variables, unique code per variable, the value sets and descriptions and other things like datatypes, cardinalities, in some instances also derivation methods like the summation of scores to get a total.
Then the purpose of instrument / archetype, the interpretation and bibliographic references should go outside the archetype itself.
But when I examine I see that the keyword [medline] is used...Is it possible
to use any keyword or they will be fixed in the ADL/AOM?? If it is going to
be fixed, then correct keyword should be [PMID] (I guess stands for PubMed
ID) as this is the unique index number to the paper including the ones that
can be accessed using medline....
the AOM wll not standardise this at this stage, but the openEHR community might over time decide on the vocabulary it should be - then we can create an openeHR vocabulary for it. At the moment it is open.
In een bericht met de datum 1-11-2005 4:03:18 West-Europa (standaardtijd), schrijft sam.heard@oceaninformatics.biz:
I agree with Sam: the archetype / template should contain the core elements e.g. if Barthel index the variables, unique code per variable, the value sets and descriptions and other things like datatypes, cardinalities, in some instances also derivation methods like the summation of scores to get a total.
Then the purpose of instrument / archetype, the interpretation and bibliographic references should go outside the archetype itself.
William Goossen
we currently store purpose in the archetype, and a fair bit of other meta-data, including links to literature. I think that the archetypes have to be able to stand alone and be sensible in an editor. Clearly there will also be meta-data stored externally as well; it will take some experience with implementation before we know what the right balance is.