Changes between Version 25 and Version 26 of The Origins of openEHR
- Timestamp:
- May 20, 2008, 7:45:58 PM (16 years ago)
Legend:
- Unmodified
- Added
- Removed
- Modified
-
The Origins of openEHR
v25 v26 31 31 32 32 The rationale for the Framework Programme was: 33 34 33 * To strengthen the economic and social cohesion of the Community 35 34 * To offer obvious benefits through the collaboration of several States … … 50 49 51 50 51 52 52 * To unify European activities by providing the means for efficient communication of medical records and knowledge so that these may be understood and compatible, thereby permitting the integration of health information systems 53 53 * To strengthen competitiveness by advancing the technical basis of products and services and commercialising European inventiveness in all scales of enterprise … … 87 87 3ヶ月後の1991年初めに''The Good European Health Record'' (GEHR)と名付けられたプロジェクトの提案が共同で出された。この名前はAlain Maskensによって提案された。週末に突貫工事で72時間ぶっ通しで準備作業が続けられ，提案は期限内に提出された。判断が下される間，提案が認められることについて思いがけずしかし暖かい支持が寄せられた。競合するコンソーシアムはその業務について数年間の経験を持っているため，その結果については様々な議論の余地があった。Jacqes LacombeとMachael Wilsonをプロジェクトの役員として代表される委員会に対して，David Ingram主導でGEHRのために行われた交渉は完璧であった。プロジェクトは1992年1月に開始された。 88 88 89 The project proposal was put together in three months in early 1991 and was given the title ''The Good European Health Record'' (GEHR); the name was proposed by Alain Maskens. After a final 72 hour, round the clock, weekend flurry of preparation, it was submitted just in time. It emerged as an unexpected but warmly endorsed winning proposal, in the adjudication that followed. Some rival consortia had worked for several years to position themselves for the work, so the result was controversial. Negotiations, led for GEHR by David Ingram, were completed with the Commission who were represented by the Project Officer, Jacques Lacombe, and Michael Wilson. The project commenced in January 1992. 90 89 The project proposal was put together in three months in early 1991 and was given the title ''The Good European Health Record'' (GEHR); the name was proposed by Alain Maskens. After a final 72 hour, round the clock, weekend flurry of preparation, it was submitted just in time. It emerged as an unexpected but warmly endorsed winning proposal, in the adjudication that followed. Some rival consortia had worked for several years to position themselves for the work, so the result was controversial. Negotiations, led for GEHR by David Ingram, were completed with the Commission who were represented by the Project Officer, Jacques Lacombe, and Michael Wilson. The project commenced in January 1992. 91 90 92 91 == GEHRプロジェクトの参加者たち == … … 149 148 GEHR sought to work in a spirit of co-operation. Recognising its deficiencies and successively refining its results, in the public domain, was a key feature of its working method. Opposition and contrary perspectives provide an important and useful crucible for innovation. GEHR was quite radical in its approach and no doubt uncomfortable to have as a partner, as a result. 150 149 151 152 153 == From GEHR to Synapses in Europe == 154 155 150 == ヨーロッパではGEHRからSynapsesへ == 151 From GEHR to Synapses in Europe 152 153 GEHRプロジェクトは1994年に終了し，その活動を延長するための二つの提案はすぐには始まらなかった。そのうちの1つは健康記録アーキテクチャについての調整作業を維持するための支援活動であり，もう一つはアーキテクチャを試す範囲をより広げていこうとする作業だった。GEHRは，電子化された診療記録(EHCR; Electronic Health Care Record)に対するオブジェクト指向モデリングを適応することを進歩させ，わかりやすい臨床的倫理的要件と同様に実装経験を評価するという点で重要な成果をもたらしたが，決して完成されたものではなかった。GEHRアーキテクチャの第一段階においてGEHRの最初のオブジェクトモデルは実装経験を行うことで改良し続ける必要があるだろうということはチームにとっては明らかなものであった。 156 154 157 155 The GEHR Project came to an end at the end of 1994 and two proposals to extend its work plan were not immediately successful. One of these was for a Support Action to maintain co-ordination in health record architecture work and the other for more extensive field trials of the architecture. GEHR had delivered a significant, but by no means completed, advance in the application of object modelling approaches to the electronic health care record (EHCR) and its evaluation against comprehensive clinical and ethical requirements as well as implementation experience. It was clear to the team that this first stage GEHR architecture, the first GEHR Object Model, would require continuing refinement in the light of implementation experience. 156 157 プロジェクトは 158 158 159 159 The project had, throughout, grappled with the issues of relational versus object database representations of clinical data. At the stage of evolution of database technology then pertaining, these concepts were in a state of considerable flux. Aspects of functionality were highly desirable, but they were hard to combine. Both camps argued their case, responding to the emerging needs of complex applications domains, of which the medical record was an obviously challenging example. … … 189 189 190 190 Following this event, Peter subsequently met Stan Sheppard and started to develop a business partnership. In these partnerships began the renewed Australian focus on developing the results of the original GEHR project which has had a considerable influence, internationally in the ISO, HL7, CEN and, more importantly in many Net discussion groups and in meetings about the EHCR in the USA. In Australia, the team achieved considerable success in moving to the centre of the national development programme for the EHCR. They worked with systems R&D teams at DSTC on implementation of a GEHR server or kernel, based on the archetype model for content within a higher level information model close to the higher levels of the original GEHR object model. 191 192 191 193 192 == Implementation, Implementation, implementation! == … … 241 240 '''''open''EHR will not:''' 242 241 242 243 243 * campaign against or obstruct others working on electronic healthcare records. On the contrary, it will welcome and endorse their success in meeting the aims and objectives of ''open''EHR. 244 244
