A way of summarising your view is:
- an observation is a record of measured/observed patient state
- an evaluation is a record of a theory of underlying process.
An apgar score could be considered a way of classifying patient state into ‘ok’ and ‘not good (needs immediate care)’… or is this really a way of classifying process into ‘normal’ and ‘something wrong’? I don’t think it matters that much; Apgar and the like are used as observational evidence on which opinions and then actions are founded.
But I do think this state/process way of looking at observation/evaluation is a good one, and can be used to help clarify questions people have on this. We must update the wiki pages on this.
- thomas
Gerard Freriks wrote:
(attachments)
