As well as CKM, quite a number of implementers/ modellers make their openEHR content available via GitHub. @erik.sundvall@vanessap@bna amongst others
However keeping track of where those repos live or whether they contain clinical models vs. other software artefactsm is quite challenging…
I have two proposals
Perhaps setup some sort of registry of GH accounts with public openEHR content repos.
Tag those repos which explicitly have archetypes or template with something like ‘openehr-content’, so that they can be clearly identified.GitHub Topics seems a good fit for this as it is readily searchable Topics on GitHub · GitHub
Part of my thinking was to make it easy by allowing people to publish their accounts on such an ‘awesome’ page but make that largely self-managing by ‘tagging’ any content-related repos.
You can then use the GitHub api / search box or their new GH CLI tool
ian@MacBook-Pro hse-docs % gh search repos --topic=openehr-content
Showing 2 of 2 repositories
NAME DESCRIPTION VISIBILITY UPDATED
freshehrteam/Salford_PROM public about 24 minutes ago
freshehr/nhs-pgx NHS Pharmacogenetics project private about 2 months ago
So the Topic to add to any repository that contains openehr archetypes, templates or gdl is
@erik.sundvall -instead, or as well as outputting the links to a web-page, it might be worth considering a tool that would parse the contents of a repo and create a Markdown formatted list of contained archetypes and templates (along with their human concept names. That can be added to the repo README which I understand to be searchable in GitHub.
Could everyone who is keen on the idea and already publishes openEHR content on Github, add openehr-content as a “Topic” to any repos and let me know so that I can test that we are picking them up in GH searches.
Isn’t openehr-content a bit generic if it is to be used only for archetypes and templates? Maybe something like openehr-models is more descriptive. And then we can also have openehr-tools for implementations, to say something.
But this is just a though, I don’t want to enter into defining full ontology of openEHR topics
I’m definitely up for other suggestions - I wanted to include valuesets, GDLs, AQL etc i.e. anything that is not ‘code’ as such which was why I did not want to use ‘models’ maybe ‘openehr-care-content’?