[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [COAS-List] tentative model of CEN PT27
Thank-you for the model I will look at it and try to further understand it and where CEN is.
Several models were reviewed and used in determining the final model. Each model contained things that were valuable in helping us understand the problem and ensuring that we had a model that would accommodate the majority of needs.
Although this model is simplistic it is also powerful enough to provide the extensibility that is needed in the health care domain. There are many individuals working on efforts to define and categorize health care information. However, there is not a great deal of consensus at this time. Consequently, we needed to provide a model that could accommodate the efforts of these individuals as their work progresses and at the same time make something available today to help in moving the health care information technology forward. "Finding a simple solution takes time and effort, which can be frustrating. People often react to a simple model by saying, "Oh yes, that's obvious" and thinking "So why did it take so long to come up with it?" But simple models are always worth the effort. Not only do they make things easier to build, but more importantly they make them easier to maintain and extend in the future."
The following is a start of outlining the differences in the two paradigms. I am still a bit hesitant to catagorize CEN.
Property CORBA HL7
Basic paradigm Object-orientation, management of distributed objects Messaging concept
Architectural concept Object management Architecture (OMA) No
Middleware of common services Yes, generic healthcare specific facilities can be developed No
Interoperability Yes No
Level of standardization Standardized architecture and common object services Standardized messages
Adding new applications Partial development, using excising objects To be developed independently, using standardized messages
Support Limited, but increasing Many suppliers
Future developments New services and facilities, healthcare specific New messages
What I see HL7 and CEN doing is collaborating on "what" is medical information, "what" are the structures, "what" are the sets of things that need to exist? When these things have been designed and agreed upon then they will need to be published so that clients and servers can access them. Until that time clients and servers will agree on their own interpretations in order to attain interoperability.
Because HL7 is a voluntary organization efforts to move things forward are based on the level of participation that organizations will allow and deem essential to their market. Unfortunately, this is not always in the best interest of the health care information technology sector. CEN seems to be geared in a different light and maybe could move more quickly on their feet in developing these "whats" for medical information.
>>> Angelo Rossi Mori <rossi@color.irmkant.rm.cnr.it> 02/02 8:52 AM >>>
Tom,
in order to facilitate the mutual understanding,
I tried to produce a model of the Clinical Information,
as intended in CEN PT27.
I hope it could be useful.
My concern about COAS is that its model is very general,
whereas the models in the HL7 RIM (or the equivalent in CEN)
are specific.
Who will make the bridge, to let them work
in synergy ?
In other words, I understand that according to an attitude
in CORBA, your services are very general,
and then you trust in other bodies to complete the gap.
You know more than me on this topic,
and I have to assume that the approach is correct
(and robust).
Novertheless, I ask myself:
when HL7 or CEN will produce the intermediate standards
that will allow a plug-and-play interoperability ?
Angelo