As promised some weeks ago, we have now set up a new openEHR-13606 mailing list. The purpose of this list is to discuss the use of openEHR methods, technology and tools for current and future revisions of the ISO 13606 standard.
The new list is located [here](http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-13606_lists.openehr.org). (This is on the new list server; in case of any problems, please report on the openehr-technical list).
One of the key topic areas of interest right now is what proposal(s) will be made for the ISO 13606 3 year revision, which will commence in CEN/ISO about now. There are clearly improvements / fixes to be made to 13606 part 1 (EHR Extract reference model), while 13606 part 2 - currently the 1.4 release of ADL/AOM - could be updated to the ADL/AOM 1.5 specifications nearing completion in openEHR. Doing this would enable 13606 with proper specialisation and templates, add other enhancements, as well as removing errors that were in version 1.4. See [here](http://www.openehr.org/wiki/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=196633) for details.
The openEHR implementation community has learned a lot about what works and what doesn't in the openEHR Reference Model. Problem reports are tracked [here](http://www.openehr.org/issues/browse/SPECPR), and some initial discussions on model changes are [here](http://www.openehr.org/wiki/display/spec/openEHR+%7E+13606+2012+revision+-+alignment+proposals) and [here](http://www.openehr.org/wiki/display/spec/openEHR+2.x+RM+proposals+-+lower+information+model)[](http://www.openehr.org/wiki/display/spec/openEHR+2.x+RM+proposals+-+lower+information+model). With a bit of work, a better version of the RM should be available in the next few months.
Additionally, openEHR has a very flexible [EHR Extract model](http://www.openehr.org/svn/specification/TRUNK/publishing/architecture/rm/ehr_extract_im.pdf), currently in an advanced development state (and in use in some places). Some of the ideas from this could greatly improve the flexibility of 13606-1.
It therefore appears not only desirable but possible to create an integrated proposal for the revision of 13606 being initiated this year, based on the version 1.5 ADL/AOM, revised/simplified RM, EHR Extract model coupled with modelling revisions from the 13606 community. This would be extremely useful to national European e-health programmes and EC-funded projects, and would help to reduce the ongoing confusion in the e-health standards space.
We hope this list provides a useful resource.
- thomas beale
Dear Thomas,
Thanks for your effort for getting the 13606 going and sync-up with the openEHR!
As I continue to learn about the openEHR, EN 13606 Association, etc., how does the new list related to the EN 13606 Association? I thought the EN 13606 Association took over the ISO revision responsibility. Sorry for my ignorance!
BTW: Was there a meeting at EN 13606 Association last month (Feb. 15-16) to discussion of the 13606 revision? If so, any outcome that you can share?
Again, many thanks for your effort!!
–Wo
Dear Thomas,
Much thanks for the background info!
When I was at the HL7 in San Antonio, I have a good chat with Huge Leslie about some history on 13606 in relationship with TC215, etc. It is sad that technology couldn’t go forward due to personal ego/agenda/etc.
By seeing about of traffic and effort within openEHR, I would fully agree and support the continuation of openEHR activities since there is a group of community willing to work together. Again, thanks for setting up the new reflector since most of my work (EHR Management and Preservation or EHR-MP) will rely heavily on 13606.
As a side question: I understand there is a discussion of about having an openEHR conference sometime in Sep/Oct in Europe. May I seek your advice on what happens if: I’m planning (still subject for my company’s approval) to organize and chair a workshop session on EHR-MP within the International CODATA in Taipei from Oct. 28 – 31? Would it be a competition with your openEHR conference (I sure hope NOT)? It would be a peer review paper submission conference and the selected papers may potentially be published at the ACM special publication. My ultimate goal is to gather good input requirements and potential collaborators to do standard work at TC215. Talking about TC215, I made a presentation on EHR-MP last May with TC215 and there were four WGs (WG1, WG3, WG4, and WG8) have interested in this work. At the last TC215 meeting (Sept. 2011, Chicago), WG8 (Requirements) asked me again when can the new work item begin and I told them that ideal would be this May but I still would like to gather more inputs and seek more collaborators in order to do a good job on standards. I probably will submit something in for this May but will continue to seek ideas and collaborators. Another question: if there is no direct competition between your openEHR conf. and the CODATA session on EHR-MP, would you or Sam be interested be as a co-chair or peer review committee member for this special topic? If there is a travel budget issue, there is no requirement for the co-chair to be presented at the CODATA meeting (sorry, I don’t have the budget to help for travel). I could be wrong, at the present time; I don’t see any other alternative/existing technology other than the archtype would be the approach to preserve clinical info for long-term.
Please feel free to let me know your thoughts and much thanks in advance for your help.
Best,
–Wo
(attachments)
