I’m wondering if there’s any way to know how many openEHR members we are and from what countries. On the CKM I know there is such functionality, but is there any way to get that information from the openEHR mail lists too?
BTW, I was invited by HL7 Argentina and I hope this could open new collaboration opportunities for both communities in South America.
Certified HL7 Specialist
Joint Secretary - Indian Association for Medical Informatics
Co-Chair, Memberships - HL7 India
Senior Consultant and Domain Expert - Healthcare Informatics and TeleHealth
Former Vice President - Healthcare Products, Bilcare Ltd
Former Vice President - Software Division, AxSys Healthtech Ltd
Former Co-convener Sub committee on Standards , Government of India, Task force for Telemedicine
Former Vice President - Telemedicine (Technical), Apollo Hospitals Group
HL7, DICOM, ICD 10, HIPAA 5010 - strategy, training, implementation
The Right Solution, at the Right Time, at the Right Place and at the Right Price
Call us Right Now!
Dear friends, in my previous email I asked for a functionality of the mailing lists, not for an exhaustive list of members (please read the full body of the message)
I can’t aggregate 1000+ emails responses one by one
This is a good idea.Unfortunately we only store members names and
email addresses as part of the list. In many cases the email address
is unhelpful in determining the location of the member. There are
currently 428 members on the clinical list. So far we have resisted
the idea of a more formal membership list with other member details
but perhaps this is something that should be reconsidered.
This is a good idea.Unfortunately we only store members names and
email addresses as part of the list. In many cases the email address
is unhelpful in determining the location of the member. There are
currently 428 members on the clinical list. So far we have resisted
the idea of a more formal membership list with other member details
but perhaps this is something that should be reconsidered.
I would suggest the following as an estimate:
Take the distribution of the countries from CKM (http://openehr.org/knowledge/#userstatistics) assuming that it likely will be similar to the actual distribution.
(The distribution is calculated on the fly and the page may take a little while to display).
Then list the total number of members from each the clinical, technical, announcement lists (maybe other lists as well) as well the total number of registered users in CKM.
For CKM, I was quite surprised to see (hadn’t looked for a while) that we have 988 registered users from 79 different countries.
(Of course, not every registered user is active in CKM, but on the other hand, you don’t need to register at all to get a lot of the functionality provided by CKM.)
In combination, this should provide you with a good overview of the community.
Sorry I didnt completely read your email. Just followed the line
Functionality: I have had some progress this year. Im now working at the School of Medicine, University of Morón Argentina as Director of Clinical Informatics. The position allows me to teach about hospital systems to our grade students in our 5 careers. Also de to establish reseach groups that may be usefull to advance openEHR in the region.
I have also been invited by PaHO/OMS to integrate the eHealth Conversations a series of workshops to apply eHealth in Americas
I used to look at the openEHR web site stats once in a while, when I hosted everything locally at UCL for many years. They fluctuated from thousands of visits a day to a few hundred, depending on things we and other organisations were doing at the time - and the time of year, of course. In these reports one could distinguish the country from where the enquiry came – about 80 in all. A large preponderance of visits from N America was always very noticeable, which was not mirrored in contributions on the lists, which was interesting. The total numbers registered on all the lists was around 1000 at the time I last asked my web manager – a year or two back.
There were sudden peaks in access to the repositories containing the specifications and software – a mysterious caller from Romania pretty was seldom off the site for several months, I remember! The Google and other search engine hits for the term openEHR also lifted off and then fluctuated quite strikingly. I think all these sorts of numbers are only qualitative guides, though. In general, take the square root of any of them and you’re more likely to be close to a measure of active practical engagement! I interpret them anecdotally as evidence that many are interested, quite a large number are following actively, and relatively few, still (as ever!), are actively engaged and working on the cause. A not insignificant number are actively working against the openEHR cause, of course, so we need supporters who we know are there to be a bit more vocal, sometimes! I tend to agree, though, that we shouldn’t really require any information from anyone, other than the means to keep in touch if they register on the lists. If needed, I am sure an optional on-line survey asking people to register interest and concerns, could be hosted.
I think the CKM data is pretty indicative of active interest in clinical content modelling. In a similar way, the Opereffa open source software that Seref made available was downloaded about 1000 times in about 70 countries. It has cropped up in other people’s work, all over the place, but not yet, I understand, resulted in any code extensions or improvements being added or offered back, open source.
Thank you for all your energies and enthusiasm, as always, Pablo. We hope to see you in London, soon.
We can provide this information based on the lists. I'll have a look at it this weekend. I thnk we can provide some sort of simple stats easily enough, but they are not likely to be very accurate, since it will only be based on domain names, and there is a lot of .com and .org TLDs. But it won't be useless either. I'll try to post something in the next few days.
Also, there will be a new website up for comment in a few days.
