Great meeting on Tuesday, and I am sorry that I missed it. The recording was very helpful! FYI, I am more likely to be able to attend Mondays than Tuesday mornings.
A couple of thoughts came up while listening to the conversation:
- The overarching vision is certainly one that we have had for a long time, but have not been successful in capturing. There was a lot of similar work done in MVP and Xforms where thought to be the way to make the interactions cross-platform to mobile. Synch versus offline databases never really caught on, so Integration Option #2 is not really applicable for a truly offline-capable framework.
- On Workflows… I think we should not only consider the application workflow, but also the patient workflow. Aligning these two together is required for success. Patients are not linear. We would need to think about state-dependent logic that allows the patient to be updated at any point, by any application, which would then modify the resultant workflows. Getting the basic components out, and an engine that can render them with some sort of instruction set is the first step. We can then add on conditional logic.
- Households versus patients. This was also another key issue that was not fully baked into OpenMRS. This is not a simple aggregation of patients, but involves a supporting data model. We might think of households as something more than just people who reside in the same place. This would allow us to capture communities, families, and other forms of relationships… but we’d need to nail the household model at least for CHT.
- We need to think of the functional not only technical stack. Allowing for logic to perform across implementations, forms to act across languages and such, means that we need semantic operability, conceptual aggregation and a common information model. We did not go down the OpenEHR approach of using archetypes etc, since we didn’t want to inhibit the implementation of OpenMRS. However, we are going to need to include some sort of common information model and some sort of enhanced patient-resources which contain a minimum data set if this is going to work. This is actually a big deal and might make the true interoperability across legacy systems difficult… unless we invest in doing some migration work with our partners.
All in all, a very exciting conversation and I would like us to see how we can describe this whole project in a way that we can properly resource it!