Rong has alerted me to the fact that the example on page 91 of the ADL manual is incorrect - the following is how it would look. I should have this working in the ADL workbench and Ocean Archetype Editor over the weekend.
Tom
Just to be public - it is essential that the translation accreditation is not compulsory. This will be done by multilingual clinicians and not translators on the whole.
Cheers, Sam
Please also take into consideration that increasingly more archetypes
shall be constructed by a group of clinicians and perhaps with the help
of an informaticians that will lead to a formal publication. This is the
case with my MST archetypes. So neither in language section nor
description section could I find an appropriate place to write it (i.e.
as a classical PUBMED type reference)
In some other cases, there will be cases where a particular archetype is
not authored alone by a person but by a consensus group or a formal
medical association. How to handle this?
I would like to keep this sort of data in the Archetype Repository as
metadata - we have started this as I think you know. Is this OK?
Sam
Hi Sam,
Of course it is OK...I am now wondering how some poor guy with either no
Internet connection or rights to access archetype repository get this info?
I think (or most probably many have already did and thus written in ADL
doc) if we start to think what extra meta-information to load into
archetypes there is no end...So best is to put only the
essentials....Now the question is: how to define essentials? If that
counts, I want to vote for the "References" one.
As a last point, this issue is neither very important nor urgent for
short term...Just asked for curiosity