Various EHR Extract model improvements


There are various features of the current model that could be improved in order to make the model:

  • clearer (less complex)

  • more flexible (e.g. handle openEHR and non-openEHR content better)

  • be more archetypable

  • be more amenable to use as a message schema, or generating downstream schemas.

  • use more practical identifiers


Thomas Beale
October 7, 2015, 10:51 AM

These changes have all been previously implemented and can be inspected in the current specification at:

Heath Frankel
November 19, 2015, 1:48 AM

Concerned about backward compatibility. See comments in and SPECRM-6.

Regarding EXTRACT_FOLDER, I think we need to support the existing OBJECT_REF appraoch and the local EXTRACt requirement. I think the former is more common than the later but it is no longer supported. Suggest two EXTRACT_FOLDER types.

Thomas Beale
November 25, 2015, 3:59 PM

On EXTRACT_FOLDERs, I assume by 'two folder types' you mean something to capture the EHR FOLDER structure and something to provide a local folder structure in the Extract.

The latter is what is provided by EXTRACT_FOLDER - it's a purely local container structure for putting the content in.

The former is provided for by the X_VERSIONED_FOLDER class, which is how EHR FOLDER structures (which are actually versioned, like anything else in the EHR) are communicated in an EHR Extract - see file:///C:/dev/openEHR/specifications-publish/specifications-RM/docs/ehr_extract/ehr_extract.html#_the_openehr_extract_package

Does this address the issue?

I think otherwise, the changes in this particular CR should be acceptable.

Heath Frankel
December 1, 2015, 12:38 PM

Yes, I accept this.



Thomas Beale

Raised By

Thomas Beale


Affects versions