All inputs are welcomed. I will distributing the draft PARs to the PHD
group today with the plan being to submit the PARs to the IEEE NESCOM
for review and approval at their next meeting. Also, all are encouraged
to join Continua. The membership structure is a relatively low barrier,
with memberships starting as low as $5,000 per year and full voting
memberships costing $35,000 per year.
Eric, this all sounds like fantastic work - I'm not sure how much
scope there would be in the openehr community to be
actual members (many are small ISV, university depts etc).
Moreover, I kind of see the openehr end of the puzzle as being a
'user' of the standard. By this I mean that if these multidude of
devices could all talk sensibly to each other and at the end of
the process put data onto a PC in a well documented
form we would be happy.
Is the standard more about getting the devices to interoperate
with each other, or does it also encompass standardised ways
of getting the data off the devices and into some sort of clinical
patient context (CCOW etc) on a PC?
Andrew
Hi Andrew,
You asked:
"Is the standard more about getting the devices to interoperate
with each other, or does it also encompass standardised ways
of getting the data off the devices and into some sort of clinical
patient context (CCOW etc) on a PC?"
Answer:
Both - but in different areas of work!
The bulk of ISO/IEEE 11073 work is concentrated on getting devices to
interoperate with each other and some sort of device data manager (in
Continua terms a 'compute engine').
Because in many (most) cases information systems do not require all the
real time data that many device types can produce the ISO/IEEE 11073
group, working with HL7, produced a specification for a simple HL7 v2.x
message to enable 'observation reporting' - you should be able to get
hold of a near final draft of this (11073-60101) through Liz Hanley, but
a profile of it has been published in IHE (IHE PCD). It deliberately
keeps the declared device, and sub-device, relationships (when known) in
the reporting format so that the data can be used for inferencing
purposes (unsafe if the relationships are not known). We are about to
embark on a v3 version of the same and will be discussing with Sam Heard
in Brisbane about how the same sort of approach might work with
13606/OpenEHR.
Continua then has a separate activity to define a 'standard format' for
reporting personal health data - though, because I am not involved in
this work, it is not clear to me if this is from a 'compute engine' to a
'service provider', or from a 'service provider' to a 'service consumer'
- or both. Clearly this latter activity is not really a device function
though one can envisage the inclusion (directly or by reference) of
appropriate device data. My understanding (could be outdated) is that a
candidate for this space is the HL7/ASTM CCD work, but this will not
play well in some geographical / business domains - but then neither
would OpenEHR/13606 play well in others!
CCOW would probably only become relevant in an environment where
multiple applications are required to handle personal data
simultaneously in a multi-patient/citizen environment. Could be a
sledge-hammer to crack a nut in most instances.
Cheers,
Melvin.
In mail of Tue, 17 Jul 2007 11:50:19, Andrew Patterson