On 29 July 2011 22:47, Sandra Pickering <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I'm very interested in the model of the world that a GP has in her head. In
> my opinion, computer systems themselves are irrelevant - they just happen to
> be a way of asking GPs to be explicit about that model.
No.
Any more than a car engine is a way of asking someone to be explicit
about thermodynamics.
> I'd like that to be a very good model: ideally, evidence-based; ideally,
> open to scrutiny by intelligent people who are not GPs. I'd like it to be
> challenged by non-GPs and for GPs to learn from those challenges. I'd like
> transparency.
One day you may even say that you think there is little place for
closed source software in medical care.
When you do, have a look back in the archives of this list.
>It would be an excellent contribution to societal knowledge if
> GPs could make that model (those models if more than one) explicit.
I'd suggest that models are made from pieces, and conentrating on the
piece is more likely of success than trying to build whole things -
see assorted large NHS IT projects.
> As to the negligence/responsibility point?
Too vague, wooly and undifferentiated from current situations to be a
point, or a question I feel like tackling.
THere is considerable prior art and literature on this sort of thing,
some of it may indicate to you what question remains unanswered in
your area of interest.
--
Adrian Midgley http://www.defoam.net/
|