[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Gnumed-devel] Re: Gnumed-devel Digest, Vol 55, Issue 19

From: Ruthard Baudach
Subject: [Gnumed-devel] Re: Gnumed-devel Digest, Vol 55, Issue 19
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 09:34:21 +0200
User-agent: Opera Mail/9.01 (Linux)

Am 28.06.2007, 18:00 Uhr, schrieb <address@hidden>:

We are not planning to do so at least not of the simple
type. Nevertheless, I have studied the openMRS system a bit.
I am still waiting for my moment of enlightenment on why
GNUmed really should use the concept dictionary approach.
Intellectually I have a lot of sympathy for the paradigma
but I don't yet see the must-use place in GNUmed - although
I have a nagging feeling I just miss it.

Open MRS is breaking the concept dictionary approach at many places in there data structure. Look e.g. at the personal data - all data to the patient's name is stored in one table, all address data and so on.

A conceptual approach for personal data wouldn't make sense as naming conventions or the way locations are addressed don't change very often.

On the other hand, as far as I understood the database scheme of GNUmed, FNUmed seems to use a concept dictionary approach where it is sensibel - for storage of encounters for exyample, but without making a lot of fuzz about it.

OpenMRS would habve been handy in 2000, as you started work - If I'm not mistaken, it would be "only" necessary to write a GUI for OpenMSR (and billing modules, and national form handling modules, and letter modules and and and) to get an working EMR, thus skipping most of the work you had to do in the beginning constructing database concepts from scratch - without the manpower and financing of openMSR!

Now, OpenMRS might give some good ideas, and help to polish the database structure.


.odt - Dokumente gemäß ISO 26300

Erstellt mit Operas revolutionärem E-Mail-Modul:

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]