CAMSS Assessment of openEHR
This page contains an assessment of openEHR as a 'standard', according to the EC CAMSS methodology.
Nr. | Category | Description | Nr. | Sub-Category | Description | Nr. | Org. | Criteria | Description | KO | Response | Quantification | Justification | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | Technical specification or standard |
| 1.0 | Type of technical specification or standard |
| A.0 | O | What type of technical specification or standard are you about to assess? | Types of technical specifications/standards: European standard, European identified specification, national standard, international specifications, other technical specifications. |
| Open specification |
|
| @Ian McNicoll: This is correct but if 'open specification' is selected, the spreadsheet then locks out most of the Responses as N/A, which to me makes no sense and should be raised with the CAMMS authors. |
1 | Market acceptance | The technical specifications have market acceptance and their implementations do not hamper interoperability with the implementations of existing European or international standards. Market acceptance can be demonstrated by operational examples of compliant implementations from different vendors. |
|
|
| A.1 |
| Has the specification been used for different implementations by different vendors/suppliers? |
|
| Yes | List of implementing vendors, preferably with weblinks |
| @Ian McNicoll: http://www.openehr.org/who_is_using_openehr/healthcare_providers_and_authorities |
|
|
|
|
|
| A.2 |
| Does the implementation of the specification hamper interoperability with the implementation of existing European or international standards? |
|
| Not applicable |
|
| @Ian McNicoll: No. AOM/ADL is already part of ISO13606. |
|
|
|
|
|
| A.3 |
| Are you aware of public references of the respective specification by public authorities (especially policies or in procurements) |
|
| Not applicable |
|
| @Ian McNicoll: Slovenian national policy. Appearing in UK tender documents e.g. Manchester Datawell procurement. @Silje Ljosland Bakke (Unlicensed): Procurement, Slovenia: http://www.enarocanje.si/?podrocje=pregledobjave&IzpObrazec=369504 CKM, Slovenia: http://www.ezdrav.si/category/projekti/upravljanje-klinicnega-znanja-openehr-ukz/ |
|
|
|
|
|
| A.4 |
| Has the technical specification or standard been used in different industries, business sectors or functions? |
|
| Not applicable |
|
| Probably not relevant for most e-Health standards? @Ian McNicoll: There is some use of archetypes in other fields. |
|
|
|
|
|
| A.5 |
| Do the products that implement the technical specification or standard have a significant market share of adoption? | For ‘market demand’, the penetration and acceptance of products implementing the technical specification or standard in the market is addressed. |
| Not applicable |
|
| @Ian McNicoll: This is tricky since it depends on what is meant by 'significant market share'. There are certainly numerous companies using the standards to deploy EHR systems and number of national organisations have adopted or are investigating national clinical content development, based on openEHR. |
|
|
|
|
|
| A.6 |
| Do the products that implement the technical specification or standard target a broad spectrum of end-users? | For the ‘users’, the diversity of the end-users of the products implementing the technical specification or standard is addressed. |
| Not applicable |
|
| @Ian McNicoll: Yes |
|
|
|
|
|
| A.7 |
| Has the technical specification or standard a strong support from different interest groups? | For the ‘interest groups’, the degree of support from different interest groups is addressed. |
| Not applicable |
|
| @Ian McNicoll: Yes |
2 | Coherence principle | The technical specifications are coherent as they do not conflict with European standards, that is to say they cover domains where the adoption of new European standards is not foreseen within a reasonable period, where existing standards have not gained market uptake or where these standards have become obsolete, and where the transposition of the technical specifications into European standardisation deliverables is not foreseen within a reasonable period. |
|
|
| A.8 |
| Does the technical specification or standard cover areas different from areas addressed by technical specifications being under consideration to become a European standard? |
|
| Not applicable |
|
| International standards must also be considered. @Ian McNicoll: Yes .. relates to handling of health data inside a system as well as between systems. Uses crowd-sourcing methodology to develop shared definitions of clinical content. |
|
|
|
|
|
| A.9.a |
| a/ Is the adoption of new European Standards which cover the same areas as the proposed specification (or standard) foreseen within a reasonable timeframe? |
|
| Not applicable |
|
| International standards must also be considered. @Ian McNicoll: No |
|
|
|
|
|
| A.9.b |
| b/ Are there existing European standards with market uptake which cover the same areas as the proposed specification (or standard) being assessed? |
|
| Not applicable |
|
| @Ian McNicoll: No |
|
|
|
|
|
| A.9.c |
| c/ If yes, are the existing standards becoming obsolete? |
|
| Not applicable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| A.10 |
| Is the standard an international standard or does it comply with relevant international standards? | Technical specifications is coherent if it covers an area different from an area already addresssed by an existing European standard |
| Not applicable |
|
| @Ian McNicoll: Partial - ADL |
|
|
|
|
|
| A.11 |
| Is the standard or specification listed as recommended in at least one Member State? |
|
| Not applicable |
|
| @Ian McNicoll: Yes. England: https://www.england.nhs.uk/digitaltechnology/info-revolution/interoperability/ @Silje Ljosland Bakke (Unlicensed): Slovenia: From procurement of national EHR server: http://www.enarocanje.si/?podrocje=pregledobjave&IzpObrazec=369504 |
|
|
|
|
|
| A.12 |
| Is the standard or specification listed as mandatory in at least one Member State? |
|
| Not applicable |
|
| @Ian McNicoll: Yes. @Silje Ljosland Bakke (Unlicensed): Slovenia: From procurement of national EHR server: http://www.enarocanje.si/?podrocje=pregledobjave&IzpObrazec=369504 |
3 | Attributes | The technical specifications were developed by a non-profit making organisation which is a professional society, industry or trade association or any other membership organisation that within its area of expertise develops standards in the field of information and communication technologies and which is not a European, national or international standardisation body |
|
|
| A.13 |
| Is the standards developing organisation a non-profit making organisation? |
|
| Not applicable |
|
| @Ian McNicoll: Yes. openEHR Foundation. http://openehr.org/about/governance_structure |
|
|
|
|
|
| A.14 | O | Is information on the terms and policies for the establishment and operation of the standardisation organisation publicly available? | For the ‘openness’ of the organisation, the level of openness for participating in the standardisation organisation is addressed. |
| Not applicable |
|
| @Ian McNicoll: Yes http://openehr.org/about/governance_structure |
|
|
| 3.1 | Openness | the technical specifications were developed on the basis of open decision-making accessible to all interested parties in the market or markets affected by the standard. | A.15 | O | Is participation in the creation process of the specification open to all interested parties (e.g. organisations, companies or individuals)? |
|
| Not applicable |
|
| @Ian McNicoll: Yes http://openehr.org/programs/specification/ |
|
|
|
|
|
| A.16 | O | Are the technical specification or standards reviewed using a formal review process with all relevant external stakeholders (e.g. public consultation)? |
|
| Not applicable |
|
| @Ian McNicoll: Yes http://openehr.org/programs/specification/ |
|
|