# What do we do about the DEMOGRAPHIC model archetypes? **Category:** [General Discussion](https://discourse.openehr.org/c/general-discussion/132) **Created:** 2025-08-29 07:46 UTC **Views:** 137 **Replies:** 6 **URL:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/what-do-we-do-about-the-demographic-model-archetypes/7084 --- ## Post #1 by @siljelb The [30-ish DEMOGRAPHIC model archetypes originally created around 2009](https://ckm.openehr.org/ckm/projects/1013.8.20) have been sitting in the CKM since then. A few have had some review rounds back in 2010, but none have been published to this date. The CKAs are unsure whether anyone is using them (in a production environment), and if anyone is willing to manage them. If anyone do put their hand up and want to update them to today’s standards and so on, where should they be managed? Would it be better to keep them in the CKM like now, or for example to move them to a git repo either temporarily or permanently? --- ## Post #2 by @pablo Hi @siljelb a couple of weeks ago I consulted those archetypes, though I didn’t use them (specially the patient one) it actually served as a reference for a couple of PERSON archetypes I needed to create. So I would prefer to keep them, and in case someone wants to adopt them, to server as an initial point to get to the published status. --- ## Post #3 by @thomas.beale I have done new models based on an improved demographic Information Model. To do those, we more or less copied the data points from the existing archetypes, which (in our view) are mostly right, although not optimally structured. I have no doubt that others (e.g. @pablo , Code24 at least) have done similar things for their systems. I don’t think anyone has any new models quite ready to publish, so I’d suggest leaving the current models where they are. I would not be aiming to ‘publish’ them in the short term, since I do think they will be obsoleted, but it will be by newer models that are heavily based on the data points of the existing models. So, the existing models are a good source of data points, and we should leave them visible. --- ## Post #4 by @heather.leslie By keeping these models in CKM as is, it implies to novice/new users that models are in use, and are ‘good’ candidate models for new implementations, even if still in draft. This is not a new problem, but been hidden in plain sight since first upload in 2009. However, driven by a renewed interest and vigour in cleaning up and maintaining CKM as a credible source of models, like all other archetypes, we should consider removing outdated/no-recommended demographic models, maybe keeping a local GIT store for ‘visibility’ purposes while the new demographic archetypes are developed. When the new models are available, let’s upload them to CKM and actually run reviews on them with the goal of publishing them. Heather --- ## Post #5 by @ian.mcnicoll I agree Heather. As you know, the original demographics archetypes were developed by Sergio Friere and others in Brazil based on the ISO demographics standard at the time. I’m not sure that has ever really got much international traction (other than AUS and BR?) and the archetypes themselves were never really reviewed or road-tested, at least widely. For good or bad, the FHIR demographics models are probably closer to some sort of standard, and, of course, there are now a set of ‘EHR’ demographics archetypes that we found to be needed, and I suspect are probably closer to current requirements. This is an opportunity to modernise the content but of course we do need ot hear from those who are using the openEHR Demographics RM like Code24, @sebastian.iancu Ocean and Cabolabs. I’d favour moving the current archetypes to a Git repo, as I agree they are quite misleading in terms of ‘good/current’ models. --- ## Post #6 by @sebastian.iancu We developed (read extended) our own archetypes around 2012-13 based on those on CKM originating back from 2007. But as you know at that time there were other governance rules and versioning policies. So ours stayed then on v1, evolved over the years and currently are on v2 or v3. Changes we made in time (especially around 2019-21 were mostly in accordance with Dutch ZIBs Release 2017 and some Release 2020, which in turn are in -sync with some Dutch National profiles on FHIR STU3. This was necessary for us as it is a national standard which we need to adhere to in order to participate in a network of patient-portals. In time we also added other details, codes, etc as was needed by various functionality of our products. Today they are used for over a million of records (PERSON), spread over several organizations and use cases - and capture active developments over more then 10 years in production. They are used a lot also in sync process on HL7v2 Lab messages. We would be really happy to contribute our changes and experience back to CKM if you are interested. You can probably cherry pick some aspects if you don’t want the entire set. I had this discussion with some of you over the years, so I guess is not a surprise - but we just need to take some decisions, have some guidance, etc. and do the work :slight_smile: I’m not proposing new models/archetypes, but just cleaning-up refreshing current ones. Bringing them down (now) from CKM would be really pity. It will send in my opinion a wrong message, as we (at REST WG) are busy releasing REST API spec that supports also Demographic model, as well as we (at Code24) are busy demonstrating how AQL would/may work with Demographic model (I will have a presentation about it in Barcelona). --- ## Post #7 by @heather.leslie Perhaps this is an agenda item for the Joint SEC/CPB meeting in Barcelona? There are consequences of exposing ‘bad’ archetypes without the ability to provide the context of use, especially if all other archetypes are presented in projects as being ‘good’ and any in incubators as having varying levels of quality or even not recommended for broader use and adoption. If we had an incubator functionality for the Demographic archetypes in CKM, that would mitigate this perception issue and allow us to manage them in the same way as very early, raw, immature EHR archetypes. As best I can see at present, the Demographic models are uploaded to a non-configurable Project only. --- **Canonical:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/what-do-we-do-about-the-demographic-model-archetypes/7084 **Original content:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/what-do-we-do-about-the-demographic-model-archetypes/7084