Literature DB >> 9600396

What is done, what is needed and what is realistic to expect from medical informatics standards.

C J McDonald1, J M Overhage, P Dexter, B Takesue, J G Suico.   

Abstract

Medical informatic experts have made considerable progress in the development of standards for orders and clinical results (CEN, HL7, ASTM), EKG tracings (CEN), diagnostic images (DICOM), claims processing (X12 and EDIFAC) and in vocabulary and codes (SNOMED, Read Codes, the MED, LOINC). Considerable work still remains to be carried out. Abstract models of health care information have to be created, to cover the necessary domain, and yet be simple enough to assimilate, implement, and manage. This requires a high degree of abstraction. Enormous amounts to develop standardized vocabulary are still required to complement such a model, and to define the subsets that apply to given contexts.

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9600396     DOI: 10.1016/s1386-5056(97)00102-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Med Inform        ISSN: 1386-5056            Impact factor:   4.046


  4 in total

1.  Evaluation of a proposed method for representing drug terminology.

Authors:  J J Cimino; T J McNamara; T Meredith; C A Broverman; K C Eckert; M Moore; D J Tyree
Journal:  Proc AMIA Symp       Date:  1999

2.  Data standards in clinical research: gaps, overlaps, challenges and future directions.

Authors:  Rachel L Richesson; Jeffrey Krischer
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2007-08-21       Impact factor: 4.497

3.  Normalized names for clinical drugs: RxNorm at 6 years.

Authors:  Stuart J Nelson; Kelly Zeng; John Kilbourne; Tammy Powell; Robin Moore
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2011-04-21       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 4.  Possibilities and Implications of Using the ICF and Other Vocabulary Standards in Electronic Health Records.

Authors:  Daniel J Vreeman; Christophe Richoz
Journal:  Physiother Res Int       Date:  2013-07-30
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.