Re: semantic web for EHRs

conor dowling wrote:
>
>     > U.S.? (There's little here from what I can see - the
>     interoperability push is around SOAP).
>
>     In my view, SOAP is the wrong direction.  It is just adds
>     complexity and
>     contributes to "babelization":
>     http://www.w3.org/2003/Talks/0717-semweb-dbooth/slide10-0.html
>
>
> you're right but here's the rub - there's $'s in babel. Bad IT - 
> translation layers and their maintenance - is good business, sometimes.
>
> Take the U.S. NHIN CONNECT project whose laudable goal is to allow 
> patient record exchange between institutions big and small. It tackles 
> what's need - security, credentials, opt-in etc - and then ... well, 
> it gets all SOAP'y. Gateways, adapters, layers, all those layers. What 
> about a "web of interlinked data", just add security policy ...??
>
> It's annoying because think how easy linking is - in reality and now, 
> not just conceptually, some time away. (I know I'm preaching to the 
> choir here but ...)
>
> Take a patient vital - http://vista.caregraf.org/rambler/120.5/716 
> (Christopher's blood pressure at a date). This record is typed by the 
> VA vital type, http://vista.caregraf.org/rambler/120.51/1 (blood 
> pressure), one of 19 that the system records ( 
> http://vista.caregraf.org/rambler/120.51 ). Vital type is a "locked 
> file" ( http://vista.caregraf.org/rambler/schema/120.51 ), one of many 
> terminology files in VistA.
>
> Now, on the face of it, such data is meaningless outside this VistA. 
> We need a "mapping layer", an "RPC". A "type-mapper". A reformatter. 
> Layers ...
>
> BUT WE KNOW (on this group) that it is trival to do something like ...
>                         :120.51/1 ---- same as -----> SNOMED:392570002
> and heh presto, your vitals are "linked". Were Christopher lucky 
> enough to end up in the Cleveland Clinic then this and his other data 
> would be trivial to query - no longer site or even VA-specific.
>
> And this isn't an isolated case. It's true in general. (I'm working on 
> an "linked patient browser" - needs very little code - and this 
> principle holds true for procedures, medicines, vaccines ...). 
>
> The train is leaving the station on health records (in the U.S. 
> 'meaningful use' is about to get nailed down) and they're made for the 
> web of data but all we have are soap bubbles, all a drift ...
Is there going to be an RDF model based Linked Data View over this data? 
Or are you looking for help re. Linked Data publishing etc?

-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	      
President & CEO 
OpenLink Software     
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen

Received on Friday, 12 March 2010 13:41:07 UTC