CKM Reviews of Demographics model archetypes imminent

Clinical (archive)
1

Dear colleagues,

We are aware
Sorry for posting on both technical and clinical lists but I am aware that there has been considerable interest in both parts of the openEHR community regarding the ISO-compatible archetypes developed by our Brazilian colleagues, Sergio Friere and Rigoleta Dutra.
.
I am pleased to announce that we will start formal reviews via Clinical Knowledge Manager (CKM) of the Demographics model archetypes later this week, commencing with ‘Person Name’ and 'Postal Address’.

We have already identified a number of individuals who have expressed an interest in helping review these archetypes but if you would like to be involved, please indicate your interest by ‘adopting’ the archetype(s) in Clinical Knowledge Manager. When we come to send out review requests, you will automatically receive a request.

If you have not yet done so, you will need to register with CKM via www.openehr/knowledge, choose the archetype from the right hand tree, then ‘Adopt’ the archetype by right-clicking and choose the ‘Adopt’ option.

If you have registered, you can also reach the archetype directly by clicking on the links below

Archetype ID: openEHR-DEMOGRAPHIC-ADDRESS.address_iso.v1

Concept name: Postal address

Link to Archetype: http://www.openehr.org/knowledge/OKM.html#showArchetype_1013.1.484

Archetype ID: openEHR-DEMOGRAPHIC-PARTY_IDENTITY.person_name_iso.v1

Concept name: Person name

Link to Archetype: http://www.openehr.org/knowledge/OKM.html#showArchetype_1013.1.477

There is a wiki entry explaining the development of these archetypes at
http://www.openehr.org/wiki/display/healthmod/ISO-conformant+Demographics+archetypes

Sergio and Rigoleta have also kindly agreed to act as editors for the review process. If you are interested in the openEHR Demographics model archetypes please feel free to get involved in the review process by adopting one or more of the archetypes above.

Regards,

Ian

Dr Ian McNicoll
office / fax +44(0)141 560 4657
mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859
skype ianmcnicoll
ian@mcmi.co.uk

Clinical Analyst Ocean Informatics ian.mcnicoll@oceaninformatics.com
BCS Primary Health Care Specialist Group www.phcsg.org

2

Hello Ian,

i must confess that I fear I did not get the concept of the demographics model right.

In addition to the two “demographics model” archetypes that are reviewed now (‘Person Name’ and 'Postal Address’) there are pendants existing in the “EHR” archetypes namely “Personal Name” (openEHR-EHR-CLUSTER.person_name.v1) and “Address” (openEHR-EHR-CLUSTER.address.v1). The latter ones can be used to document Names and Addresses of persons within an EHR.

Now my question:
do the Demographics model archetypes replace the mentioned EHR archetypes, or - as they are declared in another (the demographics) namespace - are they not applicable within an EHR?
So either the replacement has to be made explicit or a duplication of overlapping (?) definitions would lead to redundance.

Thank you for any clarifications
brgds
Demski

Ian McNicoll schrieb:

3

Hi Demski,

This is indeed a confusing area!

One of the basic principles of the openEHR architecture, is a separation of Demographics and EHR, with all participants in a given clinical context (i.e. the subject of care and any clinical providers e.g surgeon and surgical assistants) being represented within the EHR by simple references into a separate Demographics server.

Whilst this makes sense when starting with a clean slate, if you are working with legacy systems, such a clear division is not always so easy to achieve, as many systems will have some sort of local or national demographics service which is not in complete alignment with the openEHR Demographics model.

As a result, we sometimes to have to model participants explicitly in archetypes, e.g. the ones we did for the NHS, as we could not assume that the downstream Demographics systems could natively handle some demographic entites, particularly third-parties such as informal carers or neighbours. Even when we could assume that the local Demographics system could handle these entities, it was sometimes useful to show them modelled explicitly within the archetype to make it easier for clinicians to see that their information requirements were being captured and modelled correctly. One of the options being considered is the possibility of being able to view Demographics archetypes at Template level, which would get round some of these issues.

So unfortunately we will proably have a degree of duplication between the EHR and Demographics models for a few generic concepts such as Name, Organisation, Address etc. The existing Name and Address EHR archetypes came our NHS work and before they are formally published, I would anticipate that they would be substantially re-modelled to align with the Demographics ISO equivalents, as far as we can. In fact EHR and Demographics Cluster archetypes are structurally identical and require only a minor tweak to the ADL to be interchangeable - we are looking into the possibility of making Clusters wholly compatible between the 2 models without such a tweak.

In practice, it is unusual to need to represent demographics entities directly within EHR archetypes, but for a variety of reasons this is sometimes required. The aim will be to align the EHR archetypes with their Demographics equivalents as much as possible and better still to allow free interchange of Cluster archetypes between the 2 models.

Does that help?

Ian

Dr Ian McNicoll
office / fax +44(0)141 560 4657
mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859
skype ianmcnicoll
ian@mcmi.co.uk

Clinical Analyst Ocean Informatics ian.mcnicoll@oceaninformatics.com
BCS Primary Health Care Specialist Group www.phcsg.org

2009/10/26 demski <demski@helmholtz-muenchen.de>