Hi all,
You may have noticed that in the last couple of hours @siljelb and I, as co-leads for the clinical modelling program and responsible for the governance of the CKM, have created a COVID-19 project (https://ckm.openehr.org/ckm/projects/1013.30.81) to complement the existing COVID-19 incubator (https://ckm.openehr.org/ckm/incubators/1013.30.80).
Please note: the existing incubator was previously named ‘COVID-19 project’ which may have been somewhat ambiguous and confusing.
This is to facilitate appropriate governance for the archetypes and templates as we respond to the COVID-19 crisis, as well as to provide some useful insight into data models contained within each.
For those of you not aware, the incubators operate as development and collaboration ‘sandpits’. Owners and members operate autonomously and can upload, modify and delete to suit their purposes.
On the other hand projects are tightly governed, meaning that only archetypes and templates that are have the potential (as determined by Editors and the Clinical Knowledge Administrators) to go through a peer review process and be published are uploaded to a project. Of course, in the review process there may always be situations where major changes are required or the draft archetypes may be deemed totally unsuitable and be rejected, but the intent in archetype design within projects is to create a model/pattern that will be broadly reusable beyond a single use case or data set.
In this specific case, we are acutely aware of the agile processes that were involved in the initiation of the COVID-19 work. Some initial work has been deliberately pragmatically ‘quick and dirty’ in order to get initial drafts kicked off - this was absolutely necessary at the time and invaluable as the foundation for further work to build upon. However, as time has progressed and a broader variety of use cases become evident, we have also been able to identify some reusable patterns that were not obvious in the first or second requirement documents/packages.
In the spirit of CKM transparency, location of an archetype or template within an incubator or project will provide some insight to system developers and implementers about the design intent by the model author. Of course, as incubator models become more refined and mature, then they can always be ‘promoted’ by Editors transferring them into a governed project. Similarly a whole incubator may be ‘promoted’ to a governed project.
However, critically, implementers also need to understand that being an ‘early implementer’ of data set from an incubator may be a two-edged sword with the risk of inherent technical debt. Just as any artefact within CKM with a draft status may evolve and be refined through the review process, incubator assets may also be totally incompatible with the CKM priority of creating a coherent international ecosystem of archetypes and may never have a forward path into the governed projects.
I hope this provides some clarity about the reasoning for both the COVID-19 project and incubator. It is our hope that we can continue to refine most of the work contained in the incubator and promote it to the project over time, but there are no guarantees, especially at this early stage.
@siljelb and I will do all we can to support this international effort from a governance point of view, and to complement the innovation and global leadership being demonstrated by our CKM community.
Thanks+++ to all who are actively involved, and we wish you and your families good health and safety during these difficult days. You are making an important difference
Kind regards
Heather