The following arrived a few hours ago:
----- Begin Quote
Dear Colleagues, the essay discussing and analysing the rollout of Firstnet in NSW has been republished in Version 6.0. It contains more details than previous versions but has been remodelled in presentation based on comments from supportive colleagues at the AMIA and around the State.
You will find a difference in shift from an informal style of description to something more formal, but hopefully you will also find more rigour of thought and better substantiation of arguments.
There are a number of issues that I have not breached in the essay for which I have some evidence but would like more substantial information before I raise them in a public forum.
The attempt at censoring me has failed.
The University has given me an unambiguous statement that I am entitled to publish my opinions on the matter and have asserted they ill defend my right to do so.
I encourage you to broadcast the essay as widely as possible as I am interested in getting all feedback available whether in agreement or not my opinions.
The essay is available from the Health Information Technology Research
Laboratory website on the Essays page Essay No 6.
http://www.it.usyd.edu.au/~hitru/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=91&Itemid=146
Professor Jon Patrick
jonpat@it.usyd.edu.au
Health Information Technologies Research Laboratory: www.it.usyd.edu.au/~hitru
----- End Quote.
Sounds like good news from all sorts of perspectives to me!
David.
8 comments:
After reading this paper, I am reminded of a review of a particularly vicious biography by Albert Goldman where the reviewer concluded that if the author’s next subject was Hitler, by the end of the book the reviewer would probably be inclined to give Hitler the benefit of the doubt.
I am sure there are problems at NSW Health – probably some big ones too; but I am not sure that much is gained by the publication of over-the-top attacks by “experts” seemingly with a chip on both shoulders – one for Cerner and the other one for NSW Health.
One the other hand, when I told folks about things that were hard to believe, they were often even worse than what I said.
Dear Anonymous 1,
a message whose only content is only name calling is about the most vacuous statement one can make. Put up some counter evidence to the contents of the essay, otherwise you are just strengthening the case of the essay in that there is no contrary evidence . At the same time you might consider all the hardworking and conscientious Emergency staff who are clearly crying out for relief from Firstnet - or haven't your read their testimonies?
Thank you for publishing this paper, which I found following a piece in computer weekly. I think it is important that a range of views are available and that it has lessons for all of us around the world. My comments are on my blog. All I would saya here is well done to your department for keeping this available.
I am just wondering, at what point was it determined that it was not an ethical requirement to declare that Jon Patrick has a conflict of interest in publication of this essay? Jon Patrick represents a clinical software company in direct competition with Cerner. This company is called iCIMS. Refer to www.iCIMS.com.au
When all this was happening he did not have an active company and was working at Sydney University as an IT Professor.
David.
Dear Dr More,
As at 5 October 2012 Mr Patick is still using the title Professor.
Is it indeed correct that he is no longer associated with UoS, and if so do you believe this to be ethical use of a scholarly title?
Thanks,
I suspect he is now a Professor Emeritus (many years service) and so can use the title....
David.
Post a Comment