From drcheah at pc.jaring.my Fri Jul 6 15:39:27 2007 From: drcheah at pc.jaring.my (Molly Cheah) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:25 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] Interoperability - GK3 Panel Session Message-ID: <468DF1AF.4080909@pc.jaring.my> Dear all, As a follow-up of the discussion on interoperability and Lee Seldon's summary, those who attended the OSHCA conference in KL in May will remember that OSHCA had submitted a proposal to present at a panel session "ICTs and Health" at GK3 in KL in December 2007. The session title may be modified to make it sound more attractive. See http://www.globalknowledge.org/gkps_portal/index.cfm?&menuid=627&parentid=676 OSHCA's submission had to go through IDRC as a partner because OSHCA is not a member of Globalknowledge.org. Recent update from IDRC is that OSHCA's submission had been merged with IDRC's own submission to become a panel session on the main conference to be restructured and renamed. The original submissions are as follows: Session Summary from OSHCA:* * "Open Source Health Care Alliance (OSHCA) believes that Free/Open Source Health Care Software will provide a viable and sustainable alternative in mainstream Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) for positive impact in health outcomes as adjunct to building a global knowledge society. Ability to share data in healthcare provides the greatest potential for such impact. The need for interoperability, open standards and data exchange in FOSS technology is felt most in the developing world. Many FOSS applications in healthcare have in fact been developed in relative isolation from each other. Notwithstanding their commitment to being open and standards compliant, there currently is no ?forum? and facility to test and develop interoperability among FOSS health applications. Hence its crucial that these issues are addressed if moving the FOSS agenda for health especially in developing countries is to become a reality." Session Summary from IDRC: "This panel discussion will focus on numerous issues related to the usefulness of ICTs in relation to health outcomes. It will explore the different experiences various partners have had with using ICT-enabled health applications in developing countries. Amongst the key areas the panel will focus on, special attention will be placed on ICT interventions in the area of prevention, administration, clinical uses, education and research. More specifically, panelists will describe how ICTs can prevent the spread of diseases, improve the efficiency of health systems and make treatments more effective." Unfortunately, time is not on our side for refining these changes but I have communicated with IDRC that it is agreeable that the amended approaches for the GK3 panel should be seen seamlessly and to go beyond individual applications. IDRC has earmarked the presentation of the PANACeA project and OpenMRS at GK3. For us on this mailing list the discussions had gone beyond how to have interoperability to work but actually planning to test such interoperability concepts in real locations and we already have a summary of the discussions from Lee Seldon posted here. For the GK3 presentation amended proposal, in addition to presenting issues on using open standards to address interoperability and therefore enabling data exchange, we should be able to put together several examples of interoperability initiatives among FOSS health applications for the actual presentation in December. Discussions to be included should also evolve around the different types/levels of interoperability and whether its sufficient to have "functional" interoperability and the use of specific message format for communications. In discussing options, it may be necessary to touch on how interoperability works, features, how to implement, standards compliance, advantages, disadvantages etc. I hope these ideas may be considered for the merged proposal texts but if any of you would like to express further views, please express them here on this list so that I can include them in my responses to IDRC. Rgds, Molly From dalmolin at e-cology.ca Fri Jul 6 22:02:00 2007 From: dalmolin at e-cology.ca (Joseph Dal Molin) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:25 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] Interoperability - GK3 Panel Session In-Reply-To: <468DF1AF.4080909@pc.jaring.my> References: <468DF1AF.4080909@pc.jaring.my> Message-ID: <468E4B58.9070309@e-cology.ca> There is a direct connection between "interoperability" and the "usefulness of ICTs in relation to health outcomes". Ignoring the semantics of what exactly "interoperability" means... for the GK3 audience it will have a very general interpretation... I suggest you pursue that avenue to link the two session abstracts. Joseph Molly Cheah wrote: > Dear all, > > As a follow-up of the discussion on interoperability and Lee Seldon's > summary, those who attended the OSHCA conference in KL in May will > remember that OSHCA had submitted a proposal to present at a panel > session "ICTs and Health" at GK3 in KL in December 2007. The session > title may be modified to make it sound more attractive. See > http://www.globalknowledge.org/gkps_portal/index.cfm?&menuid=627&parentid=676 > > > OSHCA's submission had to go through IDRC as a partner because OSHCA is > not a member of Globalknowledge.org. Recent update from IDRC is that > OSHCA's submission had been merged with IDRC's own submission to become > a panel session on the main conference to be restructured and renamed. > > The original submissions are as follows: > > Session Summary from OSHCA:* > * > > "Open Source Health Care Alliance (OSHCA) believes that Free/Open Source > Health Care Software will provide a viable and sustainable alternative > in mainstream Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) for > positive impact in health outcomes as adjunct to building a global > knowledge society. Ability to share data in healthcare provides the > greatest potential for such impact. The need for interoperability, open > standards and data exchange in FOSS technology is felt most in the > developing world. Many FOSS applications in healthcare have in fact been > developed in relative isolation from each other. Notwithstanding their > commitment to being open and standards compliant, there currently is no > ?forum? and facility to test and develop interoperability among FOSS > health applications. Hence its crucial that these issues are addressed > if moving the FOSS agenda for health especially in developing countries > is to become a reality." > > > Session Summary from IDRC: > "This panel discussion will focus on numerous issues related to the > usefulness of ICTs in relation to health outcomes. It will explore the > different experiences various partners have had with using ICT-enabled > health applications in developing countries. Amongst the key areas the > panel will focus on, special attention will be placed on ICT > interventions in the area of prevention, administration, clinical uses, > education and research. More specifically, panelists will describe how > ICTs can prevent the spread of diseases, improve the efficiency of > health systems and make treatments more effective." > > Unfortunately, time is not on our side for refining these changes but I > have communicated with IDRC that it is agreeable that the amended > approaches for the GK3 panel should be seen seamlessly and to go beyond > individual applications. IDRC has earmarked the presentation of the > PANACeA project and OpenMRS at GK3. For us on this mailing list the > discussions had gone beyond how to have interoperability to work but > actually planning to test such interoperability concepts in real > locations and we already have a summary of the discussions from Lee > Seldon posted here. > > For the GK3 presentation amended proposal, in addition to presenting > issues on using open standards to address interoperability and therefore > enabling data exchange, we should be able to put together several > examples of interoperability initiatives among FOSS health applications > for the actual presentation in December. Discussions to be included > should also evolve around the different types/levels of interoperability > and whether its sufficient to have "functional" interoperability and the > use of specific message format for communications. In discussing > options, it may be necessary to touch on how interoperability works, > features, how to implement, standards compliance, advantages, > disadvantages etc. > > I hope these ideas may be considered for the merged proposal texts but > if any of you would like to express further views, please express them > here on this list so that I can include them in my responses to IDRC. > > Rgds, > Molly > _______________________________________________ > FOSS_health mailing list > FOSS_health@oshca.org > http://mailman.oshca.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/foss_health > . > From drcheah at pc.jaring.my Sat Jul 7 07:22:36 2007 From: drcheah at pc.jaring.my (Molly Cheah) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:25 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] Interoperability - GK3 Panel Session In-Reply-To: <468E4B58.9070309@e-cology.ca> References: <468DF1AF.4080909@pc.jaring.my> <468E4B58.9070309@e-cology.ca> Message-ID: <468ECEBC.6090608@pc.jaring.my> Joseph, it would be more useful if comments is supported by suggestions/examples. Anyway, this is IDRC's suggested proposal: > *Title*: Health outcomes: The role of ICT applications, standards and > practices > > *Overview*: This panel examines the central issue of health outcomes > through the lens of innovative ICT applications, standards and > practices in developing countries. The session provides an inclusive > overview of key issues pertaining to: changing health landscapes and > realities, specific examples highlighting ICT-enabled solutions, and > crosscutting issues of standards and interoperability of health > systems ? including the role of Free and Open Source Software (FOSS). > > Developed in a way to stimulate discussion within and among the > panelists and audience members, the panel balances both practical and > theoretical considerations, questions and concerns related to the role > of ICTs in achieving beneficial health outcomes. > The above suggestion came in while I was asleep and have yet the opportunity to respond. My reaction is the missing "open" to preceed standards. Comments please? IDRC wants the final comments end of the day (Ottawa time). Molly Joseph Dal Molin wrote: > There is a direct connection between "interoperability" and the > "usefulness of ICTs in relation to health outcomes". Ignoring the > semantics of what exactly "interoperability" means... for the GK3 > audience it will have a very general interpretation... I suggest you > pursue that avenue to link the two session abstracts. > > Joseph > > Molly Cheah wrote: > >> Dear all, >> >> As a follow-up of the discussion on interoperability and Lee Seldon's >> summary, those who attended the OSHCA conference in KL in May will >> remember that OSHCA had submitted a proposal to present at a panel >> session "ICTs and Health" at GK3 in KL in December 2007. The session >> title may be modified to make it sound more attractive. See >> http://www.globalknowledge.org/gkps_portal/index.cfm?&menuid=627&parentid=676 >> >> >> OSHCA's submission had to go through IDRC as a partner because OSHCA >> is not a member of Globalknowledge.org. Recent update from IDRC is >> that OSHCA's submission had been merged with IDRC's own submission to >> become a panel session on the main conference to be restructured and >> renamed. >> >> The original submissions are as follows: >> >> Session Summary from OSHCA:* >> * >> >> "Open Source Health Care Alliance (OSHCA) believes that Free/Open >> Source Health Care Software will provide a viable and sustainable >> alternative in mainstream Information and Communication Technologies >> (ICT) for positive impact in health outcomes as adjunct to building a >> global knowledge society. Ability to share data in healthcare >> provides the greatest potential for such impact. The need for >> interoperability, open standards and data exchange in FOSS technology >> is felt most in the developing world. Many FOSS applications in >> healthcare have in fact been developed in relative isolation from >> each other. Notwithstanding their commitment to being open and >> standards compliant, there currently is no ?forum? and facility to >> test and develop interoperability among FOSS health applications. >> Hence its crucial that these issues are addressed if moving the FOSS >> agenda for health especially in developing countries is to become a >> reality." >> >> >> Session Summary from IDRC: >> "This panel discussion will focus on numerous issues related to the >> usefulness of ICTs in relation to health outcomes. It will explore >> the different experiences various partners have had with using >> ICT-enabled health applications in developing countries. Amongst the >> key areas the panel will focus on, special attention will be placed >> on ICT interventions in the area of prevention, administration, >> clinical uses, education and research. More specifically, panelists >> will describe how ICTs can prevent the spread of diseases, improve >> the efficiency of health systems and make treatments more effective." >> >> Unfortunately, time is not on our side for refining these changes but >> I have communicated with IDRC that it is agreeable that the amended >> approaches for the GK3 panel should be seen seamlessly and to go >> beyond individual applications. IDRC has earmarked the presentation >> of the PANACeA project and OpenMRS at GK3. For us on this mailing >> list the discussions had gone beyond how to have interoperability to >> work but actually planning to test such interoperability concepts in >> real locations and we already have a summary of the discussions from >> Lee Seldon posted here. >> >> For the GK3 presentation amended proposal, in addition to presenting >> issues on using open standards to address interoperability and >> therefore enabling data exchange, we should be able to put together >> several examples of interoperability initiatives among FOSS health >> applications for the actual presentation in December. Discussions to >> be included should also evolve around the different types/levels of >> interoperability and whether its sufficient to have "functional" >> interoperability and the use of specific message format for >> communications. In discussing options, it may be necessary to touch >> on how interoperability works, features, how to implement, standards >> compliance, advantages, disadvantages etc. >> >> I hope these ideas may be considered for the merged proposal texts >> but if any of you would like to express further views, please express >> them here on this list so that I can include them in my responses to >> IDRC. >> >> Rgds, >> Molly >> _______________________________________________ >> FOSS_health mailing list >> FOSS_health@oshca.org >> http://mailman.oshca.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/foss_health >> . >> > _______________________________________________ > FOSS_health mailing list > FOSS_health@oshca.org > http://mailman.oshca.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/foss_health > > From drcheah at pc.jaring.my Sat Jul 7 07:40:48 2007 From: drcheah at pc.jaring.my (Molly Cheah) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:25 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] Interoperability - GK3 Panel Session In-Reply-To: <468ECEBC.6090608@pc.jaring.my> References: <468DF1AF.4080909@pc.jaring.my> <468E4B58.9070309@e-cology.ca> <468ECEBC.6090608@pc.jaring.my> Message-ID: <468ED300.9010903@pc.jaring.my> I had actually suggested the Title to be this: Health outcomes: The role of open standards and interoperability in ICT applications. The word "role" may be substituted by "significance" or "importance" which is preferable to me. "Role" sounds too passive whereas either of the other two words calls for evidence and the need to be supported. Molly Molly Cheah wrote: > Joseph, it would be more useful if comments is supported by > suggestions/examples. > Anyway, this is IDRC's suggested proposal: > >> *Title*: Health outcomes: The role of ICT applications, standards and >> practices >> >> *Overview*: This panel examines the central issue of health outcomes >> through the lens of innovative ICT applications, standards and >> practices in developing countries. The session provides an inclusive >> overview of key issues pertaining to: changing health landscapes and >> realities, specific examples highlighting ICT-enabled solutions, and >> crosscutting issues of standards and interoperability of health >> systems ? including the role of Free and Open Source Software (FOSS). >> >> Developed in a way to stimulate discussion within and among the >> panelists and audience members, the panel balances both practical and >> theoretical considerations, questions and concerns related to the >> role of ICTs in achieving beneficial health outcomes. >> > The above suggestion came in while I was asleep and have yet the > opportunity to respond. My reaction is the missing "open" to preceed > standards. > Comments please? IDRC wants the final comments end of the day (Ottawa > time). > > Molly > Joseph Dal Molin wrote: > >> There is a direct connection between "interoperability" and the >> "usefulness of ICTs in relation to health outcomes". Ignoring the >> semantics of what exactly "interoperability" means... for the GK3 >> audience it will have a very general interpretation... I suggest you >> pursue that avenue to link the two session abstracts. >> >> Joseph >> >> Molly Cheah wrote: >> >>> Dear all, >>> >>> As a follow-up of the discussion on interoperability and Lee >>> Seldon's summary, those who attended the OSHCA conference in KL in >>> May will remember that OSHCA had submitted a proposal to present at >>> a panel session "ICTs and Health" at GK3 in KL in December 2007. The >>> session title may be modified to make it sound more attractive. See >>> http://www.globalknowledge.org/gkps_portal/index.cfm?&menuid=627&parentid=676 >>> >>> >>> OSHCA's submission had to go through IDRC as a partner because OSHCA >>> is not a member of Globalknowledge.org. Recent update from IDRC is >>> that OSHCA's submission had been merged with IDRC's own submission >>> to become a panel session on the main conference to be restructured >>> and renamed. >>> >>> The original submissions are as follows: >>> >>> Session Summary from OSHCA:* >>> * >>> >>> "Open Source Health Care Alliance (OSHCA) believes that Free/Open >>> Source Health Care Software will provide a viable and sustainable >>> alternative in mainstream Information and Communication Technologies >>> (ICT) for positive impact in health outcomes as adjunct to building >>> a global knowledge society. Ability to share data in healthcare >>> provides the greatest potential for such impact. The need for >>> interoperability, open standards and data exchange in FOSS >>> technology is felt most in the developing world. Many FOSS >>> applications in healthcare have in fact been developed in relative >>> isolation from each other. Notwithstanding their commitment to being >>> open and standards compliant, there currently is no ?forum? and >>> facility to test and develop interoperability among FOSS health >>> applications. Hence its crucial that these issues are addressed if >>> moving the FOSS agenda for health especially in developing countries >>> is to become a reality." >>> >>> >>> Session Summary from IDRC: >>> "This panel discussion will focus on numerous issues related to the >>> usefulness of ICTs in relation to health outcomes. It will explore >>> the different experiences various partners have had with using >>> ICT-enabled health applications in developing countries. Amongst the >>> key areas the panel will focus on, special attention will be placed >>> on ICT interventions in the area of prevention, administration, >>> clinical uses, education and research. More specifically, panelists >>> will describe how ICTs can prevent the spread of diseases, improve >>> the efficiency of health systems and make treatments more effective." >>> >>> Unfortunately, time is not on our side for refining these changes >>> but I have communicated with IDRC that it is agreeable that the >>> amended approaches for the GK3 panel should be seen seamlessly and >>> to go beyond individual applications. IDRC has earmarked the >>> presentation of the PANACeA project and OpenMRS at GK3. For us on >>> this mailing list the discussions had gone beyond how to have >>> interoperability to work but actually planning to test such >>> interoperability concepts in real locations and we already have a >>> summary of the discussions from Lee Seldon posted here. >>> >>> For the GK3 presentation amended proposal, in addition to presenting >>> issues on using open standards to address interoperability and >>> therefore enabling data exchange, we should be able to put together >>> several examples of interoperability initiatives among FOSS health >>> applications for the actual presentation in December. Discussions to >>> be included should also evolve around the different types/levels of >>> interoperability and whether its sufficient to have "functional" >>> interoperability and the use of specific message format for >>> communications. In discussing options, it may be necessary to touch >>> on how interoperability works, features, how to implement, standards >>> compliance, advantages, disadvantages etc. >>> >>> I hope these ideas may be considered for the merged proposal texts >>> but if any of you would like to express further views, please >>> express them here on this list so that I can include them in my >>> responses to IDRC. >>> >>> Rgds, >>> Molly >>> _______________________________________________ >>> FOSS_health mailing list >>> FOSS_health@oshca.org >>> http://mailman.oshca.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/foss_health >>> . >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> FOSS_health mailing list >> FOSS_health@oshca.org >> http://mailman.oshca.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/foss_health >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > FOSS_health mailing list > FOSS_health@oshca.org > http://mailman.oshca.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/foss_health > > From dalmolin at e-cology.ca Sat Jul 7 08:54:27 2007 From: dalmolin at e-cology.ca (Joseph Dal Molin) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:25 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] Interoperability - GK3 Panel Session In-Reply-To: <468ECEBC.6090608@pc.jaring.my> References: <468DF1AF.4080909@pc.jaring.my> <468E4B58.9070309@e-cology.ca> <468ECEBC.6090608@pc.jaring.my> Message-ID: <468EE443.7050809@e-cology.ca> Unfortunately it was well past the end of the business day here in Ontario (Ottawa is in Ontario) when this message was received so I am not sure that these comments will be helpful given the deadline IDRC gave you. In any case.... here goes: Interoperability helps connect the dots and provide the framework to support feedback loops in health systems. This is essential to support continuous evidence based improvement of health care delivery etc. as well as providing evidence based decision support at the point of care. FOSS should make connecting the dots easier and faster to achieve. Where I got stumped is thinking of examples from the developing world....you might want to look at the report I did for IDRC last fall that fed into the Panacea project. Joseph Molly Cheah wrote: > Joseph, it would be more useful if comments is supported by > suggestions/examples. > Anyway, this is IDRC's suggested proposal: > >> *Title*: Health outcomes: The role of ICT applications, standards and >> practices >> >> *Overview*: This panel examines the central issue of health outcomes >> through the lens of innovative ICT applications, standards and >> practices in developing countries. The session provides an inclusive >> overview of key issues pertaining to: changing health landscapes and >> realities, specific examples highlighting ICT-enabled solutions, and >> crosscutting issues of standards and interoperability of health >> systems ? including the role of Free and Open Source Software (FOSS). >> >> Developed in a way to stimulate discussion within and among the >> panelists and audience members, the panel balances both practical and >> theoretical considerations, questions and concerns related to the role >> of ICTs in achieving beneficial health outcomes. >> > The above suggestion came in while I was asleep and have yet the > opportunity to respond. My reaction is the missing "open" to preceed > standards. > Comments please? IDRC wants the final comments end of the day (Ottawa > time). > > Molly > Joseph Dal Molin wrote: > >> There is a direct connection between "interoperability" and the >> "usefulness of ICTs in relation to health outcomes". Ignoring the >> semantics of what exactly "interoperability" means... for the GK3 >> audience it will have a very general interpretation... I suggest you >> pursue that avenue to link the two session abstracts. >> >> Joseph >> >> Molly Cheah wrote: >> >>> Dear all, >>> >>> As a follow-up of the discussion on interoperability and Lee Seldon's >>> summary, those who attended the OSHCA conference in KL in May will >>> remember that OSHCA had submitted a proposal to present at a panel >>> session "ICTs and Health" at GK3 in KL in December 2007. The session >>> title may be modified to make it sound more attractive. See >>> http://www.globalknowledge.org/gkps_portal/index.cfm?&menuid=627&parentid=676 >>> >>> >>> OSHCA's submission had to go through IDRC as a partner because OSHCA >>> is not a member of Globalknowledge.org. Recent update from IDRC is >>> that OSHCA's submission had been merged with IDRC's own submission to >>> become a panel session on the main conference to be restructured and >>> renamed. >>> >>> The original submissions are as follows: >>> >>> Session Summary from OSHCA:* >>> * >>> >>> "Open Source Health Care Alliance (OSHCA) believes that Free/Open >>> Source Health Care Software will provide a viable and sustainable >>> alternative in mainstream Information and Communication Technologies >>> (ICT) for positive impact in health outcomes as adjunct to building a >>> global knowledge society. Ability to share data in healthcare >>> provides the greatest potential for such impact. The need for >>> interoperability, open standards and data exchange in FOSS technology >>> is felt most in the developing world. Many FOSS applications in >>> healthcare have in fact been developed in relative isolation from >>> each other. Notwithstanding their commitment to being open and >>> standards compliant, there currently is no ?forum? and facility to >>> test and develop interoperability among FOSS health applications. >>> Hence its crucial that these issues are addressed if moving the FOSS >>> agenda for health especially in developing countries is to become a >>> reality." >>> >>> >>> Session Summary from IDRC: >>> "This panel discussion will focus on numerous issues related to the >>> usefulness of ICTs in relation to health outcomes. It will explore >>> the different experiences various partners have had with using >>> ICT-enabled health applications in developing countries. Amongst the >>> key areas the panel will focus on, special attention will be placed >>> on ICT interventions in the area of prevention, administration, >>> clinical uses, education and research. More specifically, panelists >>> will describe how ICTs can prevent the spread of diseases, improve >>> the efficiency of health systems and make treatments more effective." >>> >>> Unfortunately, time is not on our side for refining these changes but >>> I have communicated with IDRC that it is agreeable that the amended >>> approaches for the GK3 panel should be seen seamlessly and to go >>> beyond individual applications. IDRC has earmarked the presentation >>> of the PANACeA project and OpenMRS at GK3. For us on this mailing >>> list the discussions had gone beyond how to have interoperability to >>> work but actually planning to test such interoperability concepts in >>> real locations and we already have a summary of the discussions from >>> Lee Seldon posted here. >>> >>> For the GK3 presentation amended proposal, in addition to presenting >>> issues on using open standards to address interoperability and >>> therefore enabling data exchange, we should be able to put together >>> several examples of interoperability initiatives among FOSS health >>> applications for the actual presentation in December. Discussions to >>> be included should also evolve around the different types/levels of >>> interoperability and whether its sufficient to have "functional" >>> interoperability and the use of specific message format for >>> communications. In discussing options, it may be necessary to touch >>> on how interoperability works, features, how to implement, standards >>> compliance, advantages, disadvantages etc. >>> >>> I hope these ideas may be considered for the merged proposal texts >>> but if any of you would like to express further views, please express >>> them here on this list so that I can include them in my responses to >>> IDRC. >>> >>> Rgds, >>> Molly >>> _______________________________________________ >>> FOSS_health mailing list >>> FOSS_health@oshca.org >>> http://mailman.oshca.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/foss_health >>> . >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> FOSS_health mailing list >> FOSS_health@oshca.org >> http://mailman.oshca.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/foss_health >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > FOSS_health mailing list > FOSS_health@oshca.org > http://mailman.oshca.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/foss_health > . > From drcheah at pc.jaring.my Sat Jul 7 09:38:34 2007 From: drcheah at pc.jaring.my (Molly Cheah) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:25 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] Interoperability - GK3 Panel Session In-Reply-To: <468EE443.7050809@e-cology.ca> References: <468DF1AF.4080909@pc.jaring.my> <468E4B58.9070309@e-cology.ca> <468ECEBC.6090608@pc.jaring.my> <468EE443.7050809@e-cology.ca> Message-ID: <468EEE9A.6020007@pc.jaring.my> True, but like with most datelines, stretchibility (if there is such a word) appears to be the norm. I had since posted IDRC's initial crack at revising the summary for comments/modify and I had also given my comments. Please take a look at that. Molly Joseph Dal Molin wrote: > Unfortunately it was well past the end of the business day here in > Ontario (Ottawa is in Ontario) when this message was received so I am > not sure that these comments will be helpful given the deadline IDRC > gave you. In any case.... here goes: Interoperability helps connect > the dots and provide the framework to support feedback loops in health > systems. This is essential to support continuous evidence based > improvement of health care delivery etc. as well as providing evidence > based decision support at the point of care. FOSS should make > connecting the dots easier and faster to achieve. Where I got stumped > is thinking of examples from the developing world....you might want to > look at the report I did for IDRC last fall that fed into the Panacea > project. > > Joseph > > Molly Cheah wrote: > >> Joseph, it would be more useful if comments is supported by >> suggestions/examples. >> Anyway, this is IDRC's suggested proposal: >> >>> *Title*: Health outcomes: The role of ICT applications, standards >>> and practices >>> >>> *Overview*: This panel examines the central issue of health outcomes >>> through the lens of innovative ICT applications, standards and >>> practices in developing countries. The session provides an inclusive >>> overview of key issues pertaining to: changing health landscapes and >>> realities, specific examples highlighting ICT-enabled solutions, and >>> crosscutting issues of standards and interoperability of health >>> systems ? including the role of Free and Open Source Software (FOSS). >>> >>> Developed in a way to stimulate discussion within and among the >>> panelists and audience members, the panel balances both practical >>> and theoretical considerations, questions and concerns related to >>> the role of ICTs in achieving beneficial health outcomes. >>> >> The above suggestion came in while I was asleep and have yet the >> opportunity to respond. My reaction is the missing "open" to preceed >> standards. >> Comments please? IDRC wants the final comments end of the day (Ottawa >> time). >> >> Molly >> Joseph Dal Molin wrote: >> >>> There is a direct connection between "interoperability" and the >>> "usefulness of ICTs in relation to health outcomes". Ignoring the >>> semantics of what exactly "interoperability" means... for the GK3 >>> audience it will have a very general interpretation... I suggest you >>> pursue that avenue to link the two session abstracts. >>> >>> Joseph >>> >>> Molly Cheah wrote: >>> >>>> Dear all, >>>> >>>> As a follow-up of the discussion on interoperability and Lee >>>> Seldon's summary, those who attended the OSHCA conference in KL in >>>> May will remember that OSHCA had submitted a proposal to present at >>>> a panel session "ICTs and Health" at GK3 in KL in December 2007. >>>> The session title may be modified to make it sound more attractive. >>>> See >>>> http://www.globalknowledge.org/gkps_portal/index.cfm?&menuid=627&parentid=676 >>>> >>>> >>>> OSHCA's submission had to go through IDRC as a partner because >>>> OSHCA is not a member of Globalknowledge.org. Recent update from >>>> IDRC is that OSHCA's submission had been merged with IDRC's own >>>> submission to become a panel session on the main conference to be >>>> restructured and renamed. >>>> >>>> The original submissions are as follows: >>>> >>>> Session Summary from OSHCA:* >>>> * >>>> >>>> "Open Source Health Care Alliance (OSHCA) believes that Free/Open >>>> Source Health Care Software will provide a viable and sustainable >>>> alternative in mainstream Information and Communication >>>> Technologies (ICT) for positive impact in health outcomes as >>>> adjunct to building a global knowledge society. Ability to share >>>> data in healthcare provides the greatest potential for such impact. >>>> The need for interoperability, open standards and data exchange in >>>> FOSS technology is felt most in the developing world. Many FOSS >>>> applications in healthcare have in fact been developed in relative >>>> isolation from each other. Notwithstanding their commitment to >>>> being open and standards compliant, there currently is no ?forum? >>>> and facility to test and develop interoperability among FOSS health >>>> applications. Hence its crucial that these issues are addressed if >>>> moving the FOSS agenda for health especially in developing >>>> countries is to become a reality." >>>> >>>> >>>> Session Summary from IDRC: >>>> "This panel discussion will focus on numerous issues related to the >>>> usefulness of ICTs in relation to health outcomes. It will explore >>>> the different experiences various partners have had with using >>>> ICT-enabled health applications in developing countries. Amongst >>>> the key areas the panel will focus on, special attention will be >>>> placed on ICT interventions in the area of prevention, >>>> administration, clinical uses, education and research. More >>>> specifically, panelists will describe how ICTs can prevent the >>>> spread of diseases, improve the efficiency of health systems and >>>> make treatments more effective." >>>> >>>> Unfortunately, time is not on our side for refining these changes >>>> but I have communicated with IDRC that it is agreeable that the >>>> amended approaches for the GK3 panel should be seen seamlessly and >>>> to go beyond individual applications. IDRC has earmarked the >>>> presentation of the PANACeA project and OpenMRS at GK3. For us on >>>> this mailing list the discussions had gone beyond how to have >>>> interoperability to work but actually planning to test such >>>> interoperability concepts in real locations and we already have a >>>> summary of the discussions from Lee Seldon posted here. >>>> >>>> For the GK3 presentation amended proposal, in addition to >>>> presenting issues on using open standards to address >>>> interoperability and therefore enabling data exchange, we should be >>>> able to put together several examples of interoperability >>>> initiatives among FOSS health applications for the actual >>>> presentation in December. Discussions to be included should also >>>> evolve around the different types/levels of interoperability and >>>> whether its sufficient to have "functional" interoperability and >>>> the use of specific message format for communications. In >>>> discussing options, it may be necessary to touch on how >>>> interoperability works, features, how to implement, standards >>>> compliance, advantages, disadvantages etc. >>>> >>>> I hope these ideas may be considered for the merged proposal texts >>>> but if any of you would like to express further views, please >>>> express them here on this list so that I can include them in my >>>> responses to IDRC. >>>> >>>> Rgds, >>>> Molly >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> FOSS_health mailing list >>>> FOSS_health@oshca.org >>>> http://mailman.oshca.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/foss_health >>>> . >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> FOSS_health mailing list >>> FOSS_health@oshca.org >>> http://mailman.oshca.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/foss_health >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> FOSS_health mailing list >> FOSS_health@oshca.org >> http://mailman.oshca.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/foss_health >> . >> > _______________________________________________ > FOSS_health mailing list > FOSS_health@oshca.org > http://mailman.oshca.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/foss_health > > From dalmolin at e-cology.ca Sat Jul 7 23:52:15 2007 From: dalmolin at e-cology.ca (Joseph Dal Molin) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:25 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] Interoperability - GK3 Panel Session In-Reply-To: <468EEE9A.6020007@pc.jaring.my> References: <468DF1AF.4080909@pc.jaring.my> <468E4B58.9070309@e-cology.ca> <468ECEBC.6090608@pc.jaring.my> <468EE443.7050809@e-cology.ca> <468EEE9A.6020007@pc.jaring.my> Message-ID: <468FB6AF.1080607@e-cology.ca> Since this is a panel discussion I suggest that instead of word-smithing the abstract any more (other than adding "open" to describe standards) that we add some questions that will be posed to the panel to start off and stimulate discussion.... here are the ones I can think of off the top of my head: ~ Are current practices and investment strategies in health ICT's in developing countries fostering interoperability? ~ Given the high cost of integration observed in the "developed world's" health ICT ecosystems how can developing countries avoid this high cost and what is the role of FOSS in this context? ~ What role does or could open, collaborative ICT innovation among and development among developing countris play in fostering interoperability? ~ What methods need to be developed or exist to evaluate ICTs role in achieving health outcomes? Hope this is useful. Joseph Molly Cheah wrote: > True, but like with most datelines, stretchibility (if there is such a > word) appears to be the norm. I had since posted IDRC's initial crack at > revising the summary for comments/modify and I had also given my > comments. Please take a look at that. > > Molly > Joseph Dal Molin wrote: > >> Unfortunately it was well past the end of the business day here in >> Ontario (Ottawa is in Ontario) when this message was received so I am >> not sure that these comments will be helpful given the deadline IDRC >> gave you. In any case.... here goes: Interoperability helps connect >> the dots and provide the framework to support feedback loops in health >> systems. This is essential to support continuous evidence based >> improvement of health care delivery etc. as well as providing evidence >> based decision support at the point of care. FOSS should make >> connecting the dots easier and faster to achieve. Where I got stumped >> is thinking of examples from the developing world....you might want to >> look at the report I did for IDRC last fall that fed into the Panacea >> project. >> >> Joseph >> >> Molly Cheah wrote: >> >>> Joseph, it would be more useful if comments is supported by >>> suggestions/examples. >>> Anyway, this is IDRC's suggested proposal: >>> >>>> *Title*: Health outcomes: The role of ICT applications, standards >>>> and practices >>>> >>>> *Overview*: This panel examines the central issue of health outcomes >>>> through the lens of innovative ICT applications, standards and >>>> practices in developing countries. The session provides an inclusive >>>> overview of key issues pertaining to: changing health landscapes and >>>> realities, specific examples highlighting ICT-enabled solutions, and >>>> crosscutting issues of standards and interoperability of health >>>> systems ? including the role of Free and Open Source Software (FOSS). >>>> >>>> Developed in a way to stimulate discussion within and among the >>>> panelists and audience members, the panel balances both practical >>>> and theoretical considerations, questions and concerns related to >>>> the role of ICTs in achieving beneficial health outcomes. >>>> >>> The above suggestion came in while I was asleep and have yet the >>> opportunity to respond. My reaction is the missing "open" to preceed >>> standards. >>> Comments please? IDRC wants the final comments end of the day (Ottawa >>> time). >>> >>> Molly >>> Joseph Dal Molin wrote: >>> >>>> There is a direct connection between "interoperability" and the >>>> "usefulness of ICTs in relation to health outcomes". Ignoring the >>>> semantics of what exactly "interoperability" means... for the GK3 >>>> audience it will have a very general interpretation... I suggest you >>>> pursue that avenue to link the two session abstracts. >>>> >>>> Joseph >>>> >>>> Molly Cheah wrote: >>>> >>>>> Dear all, >>>>> >>>>> As a follow-up of the discussion on interoperability and Lee >>>>> Seldon's summary, those who attended the OSHCA conference in KL in >>>>> May will remember that OSHCA had submitted a proposal to present at >>>>> a panel session "ICTs and Health" at GK3 in KL in December 2007. >>>>> The session title may be modified to make it sound more attractive. >>>>> See >>>>> http://www.globalknowledge.org/gkps_portal/index.cfm?&menuid=627&parentid=676 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> OSHCA's submission had to go through IDRC as a partner because >>>>> OSHCA is not a member of Globalknowledge.org. Recent update from >>>>> IDRC is that OSHCA's submission had been merged with IDRC's own >>>>> submission to become a panel session on the main conference to be >>>>> restructured and renamed. >>>>> >>>>> The original submissions are as follows: >>>>> >>>>> Session Summary from OSHCA:* >>>>> * >>>>> >>>>> "Open Source Health Care Alliance (OSHCA) believes that Free/Open >>>>> Source Health Care Software will provide a viable and sustainable >>>>> alternative in mainstream Information and Communication >>>>> Technologies (ICT) for positive impact in health outcomes as >>>>> adjunct to building a global knowledge society. Ability to share >>>>> data in healthcare provides the greatest potential for such impact. >>>>> The need for interoperability, open standards and data exchange in >>>>> FOSS technology is felt most in the developing world. Many FOSS >>>>> applications in healthcare have in fact been developed in relative >>>>> isolation from each other. Notwithstanding their commitment to >>>>> being open and standards compliant, there currently is no ?forum? >>>>> and facility to test and develop interoperability among FOSS health >>>>> applications. Hence its crucial that these issues are addressed if >>>>> moving the FOSS agenda for health especially in developing >>>>> countries is to become a reality." >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Session Summary from IDRC: >>>>> "This panel discussion will focus on numerous issues related to the >>>>> usefulness of ICTs in relation to health outcomes. It will explore >>>>> the different experiences various partners have had with using >>>>> ICT-enabled health applications in developing countries. Amongst >>>>> the key areas the panel will focus on, special attention will be >>>>> placed on ICT interventions in the area of prevention, >>>>> administration, clinical uses, education and research. More >>>>> specifically, panelists will describe how ICTs can prevent the >>>>> spread of diseases, improve the efficiency of health systems and >>>>> make treatments more effective." >>>>> >>>>> Unfortunately, time is not on our side for refining these changes >>>>> but I have communicated with IDRC that it is agreeable that the >>>>> amended approaches for the GK3 panel should be seen seamlessly and >>>>> to go beyond individual applications. IDRC has earmarked the >>>>> presentation of the PANACeA project and OpenMRS at GK3. For us on >>>>> this mailing list the discussions had gone beyond how to have >>>>> interoperability to work but actually planning to test such >>>>> interoperability concepts in real locations and we already have a >>>>> summary of the discussions from Lee Seldon posted here. >>>>> >>>>> For the GK3 presentation amended proposal, in addition to >>>>> presenting issues on using open standards to address >>>>> interoperability and therefore enabling data exchange, we should be >>>>> able to put together several examples of interoperability >>>>> initiatives among FOSS health applications for the actual >>>>> presentation in December. Discussions to be included should also >>>>> evolve around the different types/levels of interoperability and >>>>> whether its sufficient to have "functional" interoperability and >>>>> the use of specific message format for communications. In >>>>> discussing options, it may be necessary to touch on how >>>>> interoperability works, features, how to implement, standards >>>>> compliance, advantages, disadvantages etc. >>>>> >>>>> I hope these ideas may be considered for the merged proposal texts >>>>> but if any of you would like to express further views, please >>>>> express them here on this list so that I can include them in my >>>>> responses to IDRC. >>>>> >>>>> Rgds, >>>>> Molly >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> FOSS_health mailing list >>>>> FOSS_health@oshca.org >>>>> http://mailman.oshca.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/foss_health >>>>> . >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> FOSS_health mailing list >>>> FOSS_health@oshca.org >>>> http://mailman.oshca.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/foss_health >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> FOSS_health mailing list >>> FOSS_health@oshca.org >>> http://mailman.oshca.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/foss_health >>> . >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> FOSS_health mailing list >> FOSS_health@oshca.org >> http://mailman.oshca.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/foss_health >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > FOSS_health mailing list > FOSS_health@oshca.org > http://mailman.oshca.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/foss_health > . > From nandalalx at yahoo.com Sun Jul 8 14:52:03 2007 From: nandalalx at yahoo.com (Nandalal Gunaratne) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:25 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] Interoperability - GK3 Panel Session In-Reply-To: <468FB6AF.1080607@e-cology.ca> Message-ID: <782085.18414.qm@web58707.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Why is it that, if FOSS is so useful to poor developing countries, so few FOSS health applications have come from them? For example what are the examples of those proiduced in asia? Nandalal --- Joseph Dal Molin wrote: > Since this is a panel discussion I suggest that > instead of word-smithing > the abstract any more (other than adding "open" to > describe standards) > that we add some questions that will be posed to the > panel to start off > and stimulate discussion.... here are the ones I can > think of off the > top of my head: > > ~ Are current practices and investment strategies in > health ICT's in > developing countries fostering interoperability? > ~ Given the high cost of integration observed in the > "developed world's" > health ICT ecosystems how can developing countries > avoid this high cost > and what is the role of FOSS in this context? > ~ What role does or could open, collaborative ICT > innovation among and > development among developing countris play in > fostering interoperability? > ~ What methods need to be developed or exist to > evaluate ICTs role in > achieving health outcomes? > > Hope this is useful. > > Joseph > > Molly Cheah wrote: > > True, but like with most datelines, stretchibility > (if there is such a > > word) appears to be the norm. I had since posted > IDRC's initial crack at > > revising the summary for comments/modify and I had > also given my > > comments. Please take a look at that. > > > > Molly > > Joseph Dal Molin wrote: > > > >> Unfortunately it was well past the end of the > business day here in > >> Ontario (Ottawa is in Ontario) when this message > was received so I am > >> not sure that these comments will be helpful > given the deadline IDRC > >> gave you. In any case.... here goes: > Interoperability helps connect > >> the dots and provide the framework to support > feedback loops in health > >> systems. This is essential to support continuous > evidence based > >> improvement of health care delivery etc. as well > as providing evidence > >> based decision support at the point of care. FOSS > should make > >> connecting the dots easier and faster to achieve. > Where I got stumped > >> is thinking of examples from the developing > world....you might want to > >> look at the report I did for IDRC last fall that > fed into the Panacea > >> project. > >> > >> Joseph > >> > >> Molly Cheah wrote: > >> > >>> Joseph, it would be more useful if comments is > supported by > >>> suggestions/examples. > >>> Anyway, this is IDRC's suggested proposal: > >>> > >>>> *Title*: Health outcomes: The role of ICT > applications, standards > >>>> and practices > >>>> > >>>> *Overview*: This panel examines the central > issue of health outcomes > >>>> through the lens of innovative ICT > applications, standards and > >>>> practices in developing countries. The session > provides an inclusive > >>>> overview of key issues pertaining to: changing > health landscapes and > >>>> realities, specific examples highlighting > ICT-enabled solutions, and > >>>> crosscutting issues of standards and > interoperability of health > >>>> systems ? including the role of Free and Open > Source Software (FOSS). > >>>> > >>>> Developed in a way to stimulate discussion > within and among the > >>>> panelists and audience members, the panel > balances both practical > >>>> and theoretical considerations, questions and > concerns related to > >>>> the role of ICTs in achieving beneficial health > outcomes. > >>>> > >>> The above suggestion came in while I was asleep > and have yet the > >>> opportunity to respond. My reaction is the > missing "open" to preceed > >>> standards. > >>> Comments please? IDRC wants the final comments > end of the day (Ottawa > >>> time). > >>> > >>> Molly > >>> Joseph Dal Molin wrote: > >>> > >>>> There is a direct connection between > "interoperability" and the > >>>> "usefulness of ICTs in relation to health > outcomes". Ignoring the > >>>> semantics of what exactly "interoperability" > means... for the GK3 > >>>> audience it will have a very general > interpretation... I suggest you > >>>> pursue that avenue to link the two session > abstracts. > >>>> > >>>> Joseph > >>>> > >>>> Molly Cheah wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Dear all, > >>>>> > >>>>> As a follow-up of the discussion on > interoperability and Lee > >>>>> Seldon's summary, those who attended the OSHCA > conference in KL in > >>>>> May will remember that OSHCA had submitted a > proposal to present at > >>>>> a panel session "ICTs and Health" at GK3 in KL > in December 2007. > >>>>> The session title may be modified to make it > sound more attractive. > >>>>> See > >>>>> > http://www.globalknowledge.org/gkps_portal/index.cfm?&menuid=627&parentid=676 > > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> OSHCA's submission had to go through IDRC as a > partner because > >>>>> OSHCA is not a member of Globalknowledge.org. > Recent update from > >>>>> IDRC is that OSHCA's submission had been > merged with IDRC's own > >>>>> submission to become a panel session on the > main conference to be > >>>>> restructured and renamed. > >>>>> > >>>>> The original submissions are as follows: > >>>>> > >>>>> Session Summary from OSHCA:* > >>>>> * > >>>>> > >>>>> "Open Source Health Care Alliance (OSHCA) > believes that Free/Open > >>>>> Source Health Care Software will provide a > viable and sustainable > >>>>> alternative in mainstream Information and > Communication > >>>>> Technologies (ICT) for positive impact in > health outcomes as > >>>>> adjunct to building a global knowledge > society. Ability to share > >>>>> data in healthcare provides the greatest > potential for such impact. > >>>>> The need for interoperability, open standards > and data exchange in > >>>>> FOSS technology is felt most in the developing > world. Many FOSS > >>>>> applications in healthcare have in fact been > developed in relative > >>>>> isolation from each other. Notwithstanding > their commitment to > >>>>> being open and standards compliant, there > currently is no ?forum? > >>>>> and facility to test and develop > interoperability among FOSS health > >>>>> applications. Hence its crucial that these > issues are addressed if > >>>>> moving the FOSS agenda for health especially > in developing > >>>>> countries is to become a reality." > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Session Summary from IDRC: > >>>>> "This panel discussion will focus on numerous > issues related to the > >>>>> usefulness of ICTs in relation to health > outcomes. It will explore > >>>>> the different experiences various partners > have had with using > === message truncated === ____________________________________________________________________________________ Choose the right car based on your needs. Check out Yahoo! Autos new Car Finder tool. http://autos.yahoo.com/carfinder/ From chedberg at telkomsa.net Sun Jul 8 19:15:48 2007 From: chedberg at telkomsa.net (Calle Hedberg) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:25 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] Interoperability - GK3 Panel Session In-Reply-To: <782085.18414.qm@web58707.mail.re1.yahoo.com> References: <468FB6AF.1080607@e-cology.ca> <782085.18414.qm@web58707.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002001c7c151$567d4330$0400a8c0@DELL> Nandalal, Firstly, there are probably more FOSS health applications originating from developing countries than you/we are aware of. Secondly, that said, it is also obvious that most developing countries have a far more limited skills base, in particularly highly skilled developers with sufficient financial security to spend time developing FOSS applications. I've noticed this even in e.g. India and China - the FOSS approach don't appeal to relatively poor developers (if that can be said about India any more, given that the remuneration level of experienced developers are around 75% of their US counterparts) when they are surrounded by companies offering relatively hefty salaries and perks. Thirdly, a number of "developing country" FOSS projects are are in reality initiated/funded by expatriates/donors, and I've seen a number of cases where they have their own, personal agenda and don't pay more than lip service to developing the skills base or to relinquish control. Not that FOSS health applications in developed countries are that different - from what I can see, we are dealing with tens and hundreds of different applications, most of them supported by a tiny team of developers (or just one) that ain't too keen to see their "baby" being submerged into a group of other "babies". (The hidden agendas are obvious among e.g. UN-developed applications too, where each organisation is pushing their own solutions because it means access to donor funding and status - but that's another story.) That's why collaborative networks are so much more important in the South - if each country can contribute from their limited skills base into collaborative projects, you can move further. And I'm not only talking applications/software - education, curricula, training materials, experiences, research results, etc - are as important to push collaboratively on a FOSS basis. Another way of saying the same is that developing country institutions are even more prone to the right-wing drive for commercialisation of education, research, knowledge, health, genes, etc than developed country institutions due to their low resource base. Collaborative networks (technological, academic, political, FOSS business) are one way of mitigating against that type of "globalisation for the benefit of the super-rich". Best regards Calle ******************************************* Calle Hedberg 46D Alma Road, 7700 Rosebank, SOUTH AFRICA Tel/fax (home): +27-21-685-6472 Cell: +27-82-853-5352 Skype: calle_hedberg ******************************************* > -----Original Message----- > From: foss_health-bounces@oshca.org > [mailto:foss_health-bounces@oshca.org] On Behalf Of Nandalal Gunaratne > Sent: 08 July 2007 08:52 AM > To: foss_health@oshca.org > Subject: Re: [FOSS_health] Interoperability - GK3 Panel Session > > Why is it that, if FOSS is so useful to poor developing > countries, so few FOSS health applications have come from them? > > For example what are the examples of those proiduced in asia? > > Nandalal > --- Joseph Dal Molin wrote: > > > Since this is a panel discussion I suggest that instead of > > word-smithing the abstract any more (other than adding "open" to > > describe standards) that we add some questions that will be > posed to > > the panel to start off and stimulate discussion.... here > are the ones > > I can think of off the top of my head: > > > > ~ Are current practices and investment strategies in health > ICT's in > > developing countries fostering interoperability? > > ~ Given the high cost of integration observed in the "developed > > world's" > > health ICT ecosystems how can developing countries avoid this high > > cost and what is the role of FOSS in this context? > > ~ What role does or could open, collaborative ICT > innovation among and > > development among developing countris play in fostering > > interoperability? > > ~ What methods need to be developed or exist to evaluate > ICTs role in > > achieving health outcomes? > > > > Hope this is useful. > > > > Joseph > > > > Molly Cheah wrote: > > > True, but like with most datelines, stretchibility > > (if there is such a > > > word) appears to be the norm. I had since posted > > IDRC's initial crack at > > > revising the summary for comments/modify and I had > > also given my > > > comments. Please take a look at that. > > > > > > Molly > > > Joseph Dal Molin wrote: > > > > > >> Unfortunately it was well past the end of the > > business day here in > > >> Ontario (Ottawa is in Ontario) when this message > > was received so I am > > >> not sure that these comments will be helpful > > given the deadline IDRC > > >> gave you. In any case.... here goes: > > Interoperability helps connect > > >> the dots and provide the framework to support > > feedback loops in health > > >> systems. This is essential to support continuous > > evidence based > > >> improvement of health care delivery etc. as well > > as providing evidence > > >> based decision support at the point of care. FOSS > > should make > > >> connecting the dots easier and faster to achieve. > > Where I got stumped > > >> is thinking of examples from the developing > > world....you might want to > > >> look at the report I did for IDRC last fall that > > fed into the Panacea > > >> project. > > >> > > >> Joseph > > >> > > >> Molly Cheah wrote: > > >> > > >>> Joseph, it would be more useful if comments is > > supported by > > >>> suggestions/examples. > > >>> Anyway, this is IDRC's suggested proposal: > > >>> > > >>>> *Title*: Health outcomes: The role of ICT > > applications, standards > > >>>> and practices > > >>>> > > >>>> *Overview*: This panel examines the central > > issue of health outcomes > > >>>> through the lens of innovative ICT > > applications, standards and > > >>>> practices in developing countries. The session > > provides an inclusive > > >>>> overview of key issues pertaining to: changing > > health landscapes and > > >>>> realities, specific examples highlighting > > ICT-enabled solutions, and > > >>>> crosscutting issues of standards and > > interoperability of health > > >>>> systems - including the role of Free and Open > > Source Software (FOSS). > > >>>> > > >>>> Developed in a way to stimulate discussion > > within and among the > > >>>> panelists and audience members, the panel > > balances both practical > > >>>> and theoretical considerations, questions and > > concerns related to > > >>>> the role of ICTs in achieving beneficial health > > outcomes. > > >>>> > > >>> The above suggestion came in while I was asleep > > and have yet the > > >>> opportunity to respond. My reaction is the > > missing "open" to preceed > > >>> standards. > > >>> Comments please? IDRC wants the final comments > > end of the day (Ottawa > > >>> time). > > >>> > > >>> Molly > > >>> Joseph Dal Molin wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> There is a direct connection between > > "interoperability" and the > > >>>> "usefulness of ICTs in relation to health > > outcomes". Ignoring the > > >>>> semantics of what exactly "interoperability" > > means... for the GK3 > > >>>> audience it will have a very general > > interpretation... I suggest you > > >>>> pursue that avenue to link the two session > > abstracts. > > >>>> > > >>>> Joseph > > >>>> > > >>>> Molly Cheah wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Dear all, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> As a follow-up of the discussion on > > interoperability and Lee > > >>>>> Seldon's summary, those who attended the OSHCA > > conference in KL in > > >>>>> May will remember that OSHCA had submitted a > > proposal to present at > > >>>>> a panel session "ICTs and Health" at GK3 in KL > > in December 2007. > > >>>>> The session title may be modified to make it > > sound more attractive. > > >>>>> See > > >>>>> > > > http://www.globalknowledge.org/gkps_portal/index.cfm?&menuid=6 > 27&parentid=676 > > > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> OSHCA's submission had to go through IDRC as a > > partner because > > >>>>> OSHCA is not a member of Globalknowledge.org. > > Recent update from > > >>>>> IDRC is that OSHCA's submission had been > > merged with IDRC's own > > >>>>> submission to become a panel session on the > > main conference to be > > >>>>> restructured and renamed. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> The original submissions are as follows: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Session Summary from OSHCA:* > > >>>>> * > > >>>>> > > >>>>> "Open Source Health Care Alliance (OSHCA) > > believes that Free/Open > > >>>>> Source Health Care Software will provide a > > viable and sustainable > > >>>>> alternative in mainstream Information and > > Communication > > >>>>> Technologies (ICT) for positive impact in > > health outcomes as > > >>>>> adjunct to building a global knowledge > > society. Ability to share > > >>>>> data in healthcare provides the greatest > > potential for such impact. > > >>>>> The need for interoperability, open standards > > and data exchange in > > >>>>> FOSS technology is felt most in the developing > > world. Many FOSS > > >>>>> applications in healthcare have in fact been > > developed in relative > > >>>>> isolation from each other. Notwithstanding > > their commitment to > > >>>>> being open and standards compliant, there > > currently is no "forum" > > >>>>> and facility to test and develop > > interoperability among FOSS health > > >>>>> applications. Hence its crucial that these > > issues are addressed if > > >>>>> moving the FOSS agenda for health especially > > in developing > > >>>>> countries is to become a reality." > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Session Summary from IDRC: > > >>>>> "This panel discussion will focus on numerous > > issues related to the > > >>>>> usefulness of ICTs in relation to health > > outcomes. It will explore > > >>>>> the different experiences various partners > > have had with using > > > === message truncated === > > > > > ______________________________________________________________ > ______________________ > Choose the right car based on your needs. Check out Yahoo! > Autos new Car Finder tool. > http://autos.yahoo.com/carfinder/ > _______________________________________________ > FOSS_health mailing list > FOSS_health@oshca.org > http://mailman.oshca.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/foss_health > From amidgley2 at defoam.net Wed Jul 11 17:56:15 2007 From: amidgley2 at defoam.net (Adrian Midgley) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:25 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] moving focus of primary care client design (UK) Message-ID: <4694A93F.7090208@defoam.net> Past efforts at writing software for general practice and other primary care uses has generally aimed at producing a system owned by a practice and operated within it. In the UK, and perhaps elsewhere, government preference is now to take control of medical records, moving them into data centres, and running servers shared over hopefully reliable wide area networking with clients in the practices and other locations. Two approaches to working with this, using FLOSS, are apparent. Firstly, this is yet another area where the arguments over publication under public domain, GPL or similarly open licences of the API and networking protocols need rehearsing, so as to avoid lockin to proprietary client software. One of the particular deficiencies in the UK at present is in rdesktop's handling of the smart card authentication protocols. Since a smart card system is in use - or in the process of introduction - for identifying authorised users and allowing access to records, no open source medical record client can expect to join the services used in the NHS unless it runs on a platform which can handle smart card, and the specific smart card system, authorisation. This represents an opportunity for progress in infrastructure. Secondly, the remote desktop capabilities of various open source platforms are already excellent. Regardless of the server operating system and technology, FLOSS clients could access it and present sessions on the main system. Those sessions may contain just a single application, or a complete desktop - a model which has been the base of a successful business and which I use in practice. They may also usefully remain constant for a given user between different days and different places of access. This is a model SUN attempted to popularise with their terminals and JavaCards. Given this change in focus in health service IT planning there should be an expectation built in to at least primary care record systems and tools that they will be running not on their own dedicated server, but on a machine shared between agencies. This is on the one hand a security challenge, and on the other an obvious hint toward movability of an individual's healthcare or medical record from one practice or agency's demesne to another, without rekeying or transmission. -- Adrian Midgley www.defoam.net 2007 From amidgley2 at defoam.net Thu Jul 12 02:00:18 2007 From: amidgley2 at defoam.net (Adrian Midgley) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:25 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] summary - next step In-Reply-To: <4666149F.3090604@alum.mit.edu> References: <4658F0C1.4040100@pc.jaring.my> <4664B3CE.4090909@alum.mit.edu> <4664ECE9.4060607@mail.com> <4666149F.3090604@alum.mit.edu> Message-ID: <46951AB2.6030906@defoam.net> Lee Seldon wrote: Lots of good stuff > > (I don't know if everybody watching this list has HTML email displays. In general I don't approve of HTML or rich text email. It is better to put a highly formatted document up as a web page/file accessible via sftp/html , or if necessary attach it. Using a wiki is a handy way for several people to edit a complex document with tables etc in it. I expect we'll build a wiki into the OSHCA website soon, but if anyone needs a wiki, I have practice administering and installing them - http://ganfyd.org is one I'm on the team for. I could put one up very quickly. The server won't be fast though, it would be the one under my desk which handles things like http://osborne.defoam.net/public/images/camera/venezia/ Better one on a fast pipe I think. -- A From tw_cook at comcast.net Thu Jul 12 04:56:53 2007 From: tw_cook at comcast.net (Tim Cook) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:25 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] Evaluation Framework In-Reply-To: <1182252335.3533.142.camel@oship> References: <1182252335.3533.142.camel@oship> Message-ID: <1184187413.3581.469.camel@oship> Skipped content of type multipart/mixed-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://mailman.oshca.org/pipermail/foss_health/attachments/20070711/5aa3d05e/attachment.pgp From amidgley2 at defoam.net Thu Jul 12 08:17:29 2007 From: amidgley2 at defoam.net (Adrian Midgley) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:25 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] GPL v 3 (Do we have a view or views?) Message-ID: <46957319.7020903@defoam.net> There are some interoperability implications with the choice between GPL 2 and GPL 3. (And other licences, yes). Do we wish to have a view on the default choice of licence? I tend to think that the FSF has done much good, and that the GPL version 3 is probably superior to version 2 for our general and long term purposes. -- Adrian Midgley From amidgley2 at defoam.net Thu Jul 12 08:28:55 2007 From: amidgley2 at defoam.net (Adrian Midgley) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:25 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] Evaluation Framework In-Reply-To: <1184187413.3581.469.camel@oship> References: <1182252335.3533.142.camel@oship> <1184187413.3581.469.camel@oship> Message-ID: <469575C7.4000903@defoam.net> At line 30 I'd say "may be committed to predatory lockin ..." and I might choose to phrase it in terms of risking a vulnerability to predatory lockin policies. -- A From tw_cook at comcast.net Thu Jul 12 08:45:36 2007 From: tw_cook at comcast.net (Tim Cook) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:25 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] GPL v 3 (Do we have a view or views?) In-Reply-To: <46957319.7020903@defoam.net> References: <46957319.7020903@defoam.net> Message-ID: <1184201136.3581.521.camel@oship> My opinion on this issue is that OSHCA should simply support the list of opensource licenses approved by http://www.opensource.org This a HUGE area with many legal issues. Especially so on an international basis. Each and every project has differing goals and ideals. While PERSONALLY I do not agree with all open source licenses (I'm a lot closer to Fred Trotter and the GPL than most) I also recognize that this is not appropriate for everyone and every project. As an organization I think OSHCA will risk alienation if we only support (any version) of the GPL. Regards, Tim On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 01:17 +0100, Adrian Midgley wrote: > There are some interoperability implications with the choice between GPL > 2 and GPL 3. > > (And other licences, yes). > > > Do we wish to have a view on the default choice of licence? > > I tend to think that the FSF has done much good, and that the GPL > version 3 is probably superior to version 2 for our general and long > term purposes. > -- Timothy Cook, MSc Health Informatics Research Services http://home.comcast.net/~tw_cook/ 01-904-322-8582 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://mailman.oshca.org/pipermail/foss_health/attachments/20070712/972134ed/attachment.pgp From amidgley2 at defoam.net Thu Jul 12 21:42:19 2007 From: amidgley2 at defoam.net (Adrian Midgley) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:25 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] 2004: server provision by OSHCA - for those coming in late to these discussions Message-ID: <46962FBB.40106@defoam.net> I was actually looking for something else, but this was sitting in a folder in my (open source of course) email system and I thought it might be interesting as well as relevant... Quite who the "new members" might be is another matter. Does anyone regard themselves as having joined OSHCA before 1999? -- Adrian Midgley -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Tim Churches Subject: Re: Re: Yet another denial Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:34:56 +1100 Size: 3810 Url: http://mailman.oshca.org/pipermail/foss_health/attachments/20070712/eb1702cf/AttachedMessage.mht From amidgley2 at defoam.net Thu Jul 12 22:39:16 2007 From: amidgley2 at defoam.net (Adrian Midgley) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:25 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] Once upon a time: some pictures from OSHCA's past Message-ID: <46963D14.6020607@defoam.net> Here is copy of the group who could reasonably claim to be the founders, at the summit in Toronto. http://osborne.defoam.net/public/images/toronto_summit.oshca.jpeg The meeting which established OSHCA was in Rome the following year, in the India Room of the UN FAO building Here are a couple of members of that meeting at lunchtime on top of the building, you can see some of th eresidue of the glory that was Imperial Rome behind us http://osborne.defoam.net/public/images/akmandmjinrome2000.jpg http://osborne.defoam.net/public/images/oshca2002banner.gif Here are a bunch of us at Los Angeles (2002) earlier this century http://osborne.defoam.net/public/images/cabal.oshca3.ucla.jpeg (for those who've not seen me, I'm the one on stage left in the tie. and here is the general photo of the UCLA conference http://osborne.defoam.net/public/images/oshca-3-walt.biggs.group.photo.jpg Ignacio Valdez, who has been editing http://linuxmednews.org since this collection of projects and anarchy got going is bearded and middle rank, stage left. Here is a small group in Geneva, at the meeting before KL http://osborne.defoam.net/public/images/oshca.geneva.cheah.P1010001.jpeg I see I was in a tie again, Rick with the hair is from WorldVista. And thus we come via KL, to the apparently huge task of running a computer on a connection to the world fast enough to work on it. -- A From wwilson at umich.edu Thu Jul 12 23:16:55 2007 From: wwilson at umich.edu (Wayne Wilson) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:26 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] Once upon a time: some pictures from OSHCA's past In-Reply-To: <46963D14.6020607@defoam.net> References: <46963D14.6020607@defoam.net> Message-ID: <1CE1185E-439C-45D6-BFFD-26B5EED50FC9@umich.edu> On Jul 12, 2007, at 10:39 AM, Adrian Midgley wrote: > Here is copy of the group who could reasonably claim to be the > founders, at the summit in Toronto. > This is my last word on this topic, but the past is past and continually dredging it up is part of the problem. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: PGP.sig Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 194 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://mailman.oshca.org/pipermail/foss_health/attachments/20070712/416c4386/PGP.pgp From amidgley2 at defoam.net Fri Jul 13 02:20:27 2007 From: amidgley2 at defoam.net (Adrian Midgley) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:26 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] Once upon a time: George Santayana In-Reply-To: <1CE1185E-439C-45D6-BFFD-26B5EED50FC9@umich.edu> References: <46963D14.6020607@defoam.net> <1CE1185E-439C-45D6-BFFD-26B5EED50FC9@umich.edu> Message-ID: <469670EB.6070403@defoam.net> George Santayana (1863-1952), the philosopher, essayist, poet and novelist, in "Reason in Common Sense" "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." It is also useful to have a picture of whom one is conversing with, I think. Perhaps other members might be able to upload one to their space on the OSHCA server? -- Adrian Midgley From philippe.ameline at free.fr Fri Jul 13 05:09:25 2007 From: philippe.ameline at free.fr (Philippe AMELINE) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:26 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] Once upon a time: George Santayana In-Reply-To: <469670EB.6070403@defoam.net> References: <46963D14.6020607@defoam.net> <1CE1185E-439C-45D6-BFFD-26B5EED50FC9@umich.edu> <469670EB.6070403@defoam.net> Message-ID: <46969885.5020007@free.fr> Do I have a "space on the OSHCA server" ? My picture in enclosed ;-) Adrian Midgley wrote: > George Santayana (1863-1952), the philosopher, essayist, poet and > novelist, in "Reason in Common Sense" > > "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." > > > It is also useful to have a picture of whom one is conversing with, I > think. Perhaps other members might be able to upload one to their space > on the OSHCA server? > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: nq070203.gif Type: image/gif Size: 25694 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.oshca.org/pipermail/foss_health/attachments/20070712/d06a299a/nq070203.gif From drcheah at pc.jaring.my Sat Jul 14 05:46:17 2007 From: drcheah at pc.jaring.my (Molly Cheah) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:26 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] Interoperability - GK3 Panel Session In-Reply-To: <468ED300.9010903@pc.jaring.my> References: <468DF1AF.4080909@pc.jaring.my> <468E4B58.9070309@e-cology.ca> <468ECEBC.6090608@pc.jaring.my> <468ED300.9010903@pc.jaring.my> Message-ID: <4697F2A9.5030800@pc.jaring.my> This is to inform the list that the final version submitted by IDRC for the GK3 Panel Session is as below: *Title:* Health outcomes: The role of ICT applications, standards and practices *Description:* In trials around the world, ICTs have shown tremendous potential for improving healthcare. This panel will examine the key issues in transforming these isolated experiences into broader realities. Panellists will explore the changing health landscapes and realities in developing countries. They will discuss the growth in ICTs and applications, highlighting specific ICT-enabled solutions to healthcare problems. They will also tackle practical concerns associated with standards and interoperability of health systems - including the role of Free and Open Source Software (FOSS). To stimulate a more open discussion panellists will also draw upon the audience's questions and concerns related to the role of ICTs in achieving better health outcomes. *Panellists:* 1. Shariq Khoja (AKU, Pakistan) 2. Molly Cheah (OSHCA, Malaysia) 3. Pammla Petrucka (University of Saskatchewan, Canada - working on a project in the Caribbean) 4. Chris Seebregts (Medical Research Council, South Africa) Moderator: Michael Clarke (Director of ICT4D, IDRC) See Themic Programme at http://www.gkpeventsonthefuture.org/GK3/dsp_page.cfm?pageid=649 Rgds, Molly Molly Cheah wrote: > I had actually suggested the Title to be this: > Health outcomes: The role of open standards and interoperability in > ICT applications. > > The word "role" may be substituted by "significance" or "importance" > which is preferable to me. "Role" sounds too passive whereas either of > the other two words calls for evidence and the need to be supported. > Molly > From Chris.Seebregts at mrc.ac.za Sun Jul 15 14:38:55 2007 From: Chris.Seebregts at mrc.ac.za (Chris Seebregts) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:26 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] Interoperability - GK3 Panel Session In-Reply-To: <4697F2A9.5030800@pc.jaring.my> Message-ID: <7C4615229DD21546B2399F446305D82A228880@balrog.mrcad.mrc.ac.za> Hi Molly Thanks for putting this together. I think it is a great and relevant topic and look forward to a lively discussion. Regards Chris =================================================================== Chris Seebregts, PhD Biomedical Informatics Research Division, Medical Research Council Graduate Program in Medical Informatics, University of KwaZulu-Natal South Africa Voice: (mobile): +27 82 461 5556; (office): +27 21 938 0318; (skype): chris.seebregts Fax: +27 21 938 0526; Postal: PO Box 19070, Tygerberg 7505, South Africa ======================================================================== ====== -----Original Message----- From: foss_health-bounces@oshca.org [mailto:foss_health-bounces@oshca.org] On Behalf Of Molly Cheah Sent: Friday, July 13, 2007 11:46 PM To: foss_health@oshca.org Subject: Re: [FOSS_health] Interoperability - GK3 Panel Session This is to inform the list that the final version submitted by IDRC for the GK3 Panel Session is as below: *Title:* Health outcomes: The role of ICT applications, standards and practices *Description:* In trials around the world, ICTs have shown tremendous potential for improving healthcare. This panel will examine the key issues in transforming these isolated experiences into broader realities. Panellists will explore the changing health landscapes and realities in developing countries. They will discuss the growth in ICTs and applications, highlighting specific ICT-enabled solutions to healthcare problems. They will also tackle practical concerns associated with standards and interoperability of health systems - including the role of Free and Open Source Software (FOSS). To stimulate a more open discussion panellists will also draw upon the audience's questions and concerns related to the role of ICTs in achieving better health outcomes. *Panellists:* 1. Shariq Khoja (AKU, Pakistan) 2. Molly Cheah (OSHCA, Malaysia) 3. Pammla Petrucka (University of Saskatchewan, Canada - working on a project in the Caribbean) 4. Chris Seebregts (Medical Research Council, South Africa) Moderator: Michael Clarke (Director of ICT4D, IDRC) See Themic Programme at http://www.gkpeventsonthefuture.org/GK3/dsp_page.cfm?pageid=649 Rgds, Molly Molly Cheah wrote: > I had actually suggested the Title to be this: > Health outcomes: The role of open standards and interoperability in > ICT applications. > > The word "role" may be substituted by "significance" or "importance" > which is preferable to me. "Role" sounds too passive whereas either of > the other two words calls for evidence and the need to be supported. > Molly > _______________________________________________ FOSS_health mailing list FOSS_health@oshca.org http://mailman.oshca.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/foss_health -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. From tw_cook at comcast.net Mon Jul 16 20:06:02 2007 From: tw_cook at comcast.net (Tim Cook) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:26 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] Evaluation Framework In-Reply-To: <1184187413.3581.469.camel@oship> References: <1182252335.3533.142.camel@oship> <1184187413.3581.469.camel@oship> Message-ID: <1184587562.3581.1366.camel@oship> Skipped content of type multipart/mixed-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://mailman.oshca.org/pipermail/foss_health/attachments/20070716/6375ab24/attachment.pgp From drcheah at pc.jaring.my Tue Jul 17 10:05:56 2007 From: drcheah at pc.jaring.my (Molly Cheah) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:26 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] Re: Research Taskforce In-Reply-To: <1184589054.3581.1371.camel@oship> References: <1184589054.3581.1371.camel@oship> Message-ID: <469C2404.7020907@pc.jaring.my> Tim, It is regrettable that you have resigned. I understand that there was a team led by you who helped develop the draft copy of the evaluation framework which you had recently posted to FOSS_health@oshca.org? I recollect Luciana's name being associated with this initiative? I'm copying this to the FOSS_health list so that one of the team members there may like to volunteer to take over this coordinating role? By the way, who are the other team members? Best wishes in your future endeavors and thank you for contributing your time so far. Let me know if you're coming this way (Malaysia) in the future. Perhaps I can play host again. Rgds, Molly Tim Cook wrote: >All, > >Due to changes in my personal circumstances I will no longer have time >to continue work on the Research Taskforce. My resignation as >coordinator is effective immediately. > >Regards, >Tim > > From lemoene at bikalabs.com Mon Jul 23 15:01:51 2007 From: lemoene at bikalabs.com (bika - lemoene) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:26 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] FOSS Health LIMS. Bika project starts Message-ID: <46A4525F.4090609@bikalabs.com> Dear All We are very happy to report that the project to customise our open source LIMS for health laboratory implementation has started Sponsors Advantalabs.com in Ibadan, Nigeria, are installing Bika LIMS 2 for beta testing and versing Plone and Python skills for further development tasks. First steps are to design and develop a Patient demographics module and instrument interfaces We started a project page for the Bika Health 1 release at http://www.bikalabs.com/softwarecenter/bikahealth/releases/1.0 with draft design for the Patient Demographics required, based on the OpenMRS design for medical record keeping. The project page will be updated regularly. The Bika developer and user lists will also carry some discussion Thanks for your bandwidth lemoene Project manager Bika Lab Systems To subscribe to Bika mailing lists: Developers http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bika-developers Users http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bika-users From amidgley2 at defoam.net Tue Jul 31 22:13:24 2007 From: amidgley2 at defoam.net (Adrian Midgley) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:26 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] relevant mailing lists Message-ID: <46AF4384.1070200@defoam.net> The most obvious desdendant of the old Open Health list is currently a Yahoo group. I'd generally expect that people interested in FLOSS in healthcare would take that list. You join it by going to http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/openhealth/ and hitting the join button. Regards all -- Adrian Midgley Exeter, UK. http://defoam.net/ From tw_cook at comcast.net Thu Jul 26 05:50:14 2007 From: tw_cook at comcast.net (Tim Cook) Date: Sun Jan 27 17:55:26 2008 Subject: [FOSS_health] FYI was: [Fwd: [os-wg] Nominations Open for 2007 Linux Medical News Freedom Award] Message-ID: <1185400214.3567.199.camel@oship> -------- Forwarded Message -------- From: Ignacio Valdes To: os-wg Subject: [os-wg] Nominations Open for 2007 Linux Medical News Freedom Award Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:43:57 -0500 Nominations are officially open for the 6th annual Linux Medical News Freedom Award to be presented at the November 10th-14th AMIA Fall conference at the Sheraton Chicago Hotel and Towers, Chicago, Illinois, USA. Deadline for entries is August 24th, 2007. This is NOT a officially sponsored award or event of AMIA. This award is co-sponsored by the IMIA Open Source Working Group. Free and open source software isn't 'magic pixie dust'. People making significant personal sacrifices as well as doing difficult work to make medicine's free software future a reality. This award is intended to honor the individual or project who has accomplished the most towards the goal of improving medical education and practice through free/open source medical software. The award winner is chosen by a panel of judges. Past recipients have been Tim Cook, K.S. Bhaskar -- Fidelity Information Services, Inc., Thomas Beale -- Ocean Informatics, Fred Trotter -- Synseer, MirrorMed and the FreeB project, Joseph Dalmolin of WorldVistA/e-cology and Will Ross of Mendocino Informatics. http://www.linuxmednews.com/1185396012/index_html _______________________________________________ os-wg mailing list os-wg@mailman.amia.org http://mailman.amia.org/mailman/listinfo/os-wg -- Timothy Cook, MSc Health Informatics Research Services http://home.comcast.net/~tw_cook/ 01-904-322-8582 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://mailman.oshca.org/pipermail/foss_health/attachments/20070725/43c7a066/attachment.pgp