tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-733074358901582680.post4357678844047022055..comments2024-03-23T05:28:35.472-04:00Comments on Healthcare Standards: Moving on from HITSP C32: MedicationsKeith W. Boonehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16883038460949909300noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-733074358901582680.post-83757964723392630122013-05-07T17:58:43.507-04:002013-05-07T17:58:43.507-04:00And now, of course, its free to non-members.And now, of course, its free to non-members.Keith W. Boonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16883038460949909300noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-733074358901582680.post-24112273381031177972012-10-04T16:52:02.329-04:002012-10-04T16:52:02.329-04:00Hi Keith,
1. Can you answer Dan's question a...Hi Keith, <br /><br />1. Can you answer Dan's question above? <br /><br />2. Under "Order (Rx) Information" in your post, you said, "CCDA recommends that the effectiveTime be included and that it be placed in the element" which coincides with the "SHOULD" indicated on the last row in the table on Page 554. However, both Page 405 and 406 indicate "SHALL" for this element. Whatever it should be, can you clarify exactly what this date is? Is it the prescription ordering date or expired date?<br /><br />Thanks!<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-733074358901582680.post-25909679415815929462012-09-24T15:59:13.448-04:002012-09-24T15:59:13.448-04:00Keith, you say: "The dispense should always a...Keith, you say: "The dispense should always appear inside the order". I'm pretty new to this so I'm sure I'm missing something, but the CCDA documentation I'm looking at shows Medication Dispense containing Medication Supply Order, but not the other way around.<br /><br />Thanks,<br />DanDan Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11251521409405998087noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-733074358901582680.post-12922977884911326572012-08-07T11:17:21.456-04:002012-08-07T11:17:21.456-04:00@Keith
RE: "What business model allow HL7 t...@Keith <br /><br />RE: "What business model allow HL7 to continue to exist, and yet give away its work products."<br /><br />I almost can't believe that you would ask such a question in the midst of the thriving open source world that we live in today - and despite the fact that HL7's *work products* are the product of work done by folks who pay HL7 rather than the other way around. <br /><br />I'll have to take your question as an illustration of the problem inside of HL7, and an explanation of HL7's inability to "figure it out" and adapt at an organizational level. <br /><br />TJLThomas Lukasikhttps://twitter.com/Sparkensteinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-733074358901582680.post-31124460348817886442012-08-07T09:04:41.922-04:002012-08-07T09:04:41.922-04:00What is that business model, Thomas? Give away th...What is that business model, Thomas? Give away the IP for free doesn't strike me as being an effective business model by itself. In my computer sales days, we used to joke about selling below cost but making it up on volume. What business model allow HL7 to continue to exist, and yet give away its work products.Keith W. Boonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16883038460949909300noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-733074358901582680.post-31869749784031082062012-08-06T12:30:56.884-04:002012-08-06T12:30:56.884-04:00Keith
RE: "Why would you or your company wa...Keith <br /><br />RE: "Why would you or your company waste developer time trying to implement HL7 standards without being a member?" <br /><br />The best response that I can give you is that there are 1000's upon 1000's of bright, eager independent developers out there that - whether for philosophical, ethical or economic reasons - are NOT going to pay HL7 a tribute just to help with the work.<br /><br />This is especially true given the fact that the results of that work is going to be kept proprietary by HL7.<br /> <br />HL7 needs to come up with a business model that fits 21st Century attitudes and thinking.<br /><br />If HL7 continues to fail at doing this, then maybe you ought to suggest to Todd Park or Farzad Mostashari that the government take the money that was spent on Bon Jovi and hors d' oeuvres at their latest pep rally and give it to HL7 to subsidize access by all of the innovators out there who can't or won't pay a ransom.<br /><br />And BTW: I was a paid member of HL7 for years.<br /><br />TJLThomas Lukasikhttps://twitter.com/Sparkensteinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-733074358901582680.post-472463705980804172012-08-06T10:05:48.368-04:002012-08-06T10:05:48.368-04:00Thomas,
I'm sorry the material isn't freel...Thomas,<br />I'm sorry the material isn't freely available to HL7 members, and I'll try to note what material may require HL7 membership to access. But you can readily figure that out when you hover over the link. <br /><br />This series is about implementing HL7 standards. Why would you or your company waste developer time trying to implement HL7 standards without being a member? Is it really worth the savings?<br /><br /> KeithKeith W. Boonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16883038460949909300noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-733074358901582680.post-46854953476378159572012-08-03T18:28:11.982-04:002012-08-03T18:28:11.982-04:00Keith
RE "Starting at page 522 of Version 1...Keith <br /><br />RE "Starting at page 522 of Version 1.1 of the CDA Consolidation guide (which was put up on the HL7 DSTU site in July)"<br /><br />Do you realize that you waste many reader's time by including links in your blog posts to HL7 documents that are only accessible if you've paid HL7 a membership fee?<br /><br />Unless you expect that your blog is only read by paid HL7 members, you could at least warn folks that: <br /><br />"You must be a paid member of HL7.org to access this resource."<br /><br />TJLThomas Lukasikhttps://twitter.com/Sparkensteinnoreply@blogger.com