Here are the results of the poll.
Is It Acceptable That Standards Australia Does Not Have A Program For Continuing Development Of Health IT Standards In 2015 And Beyond?
Yes 2% (2)Probably 0% (0)
Neutral 1% (1)
Probably Not 11% (14)
No 85% (110)
I Have No Idea 2% (2)
Total votes: 129
An extremely clear response with large majority believing that what is presently happening is not acceptable.
Good to see a clear outcome with a lot of responses.
Again, many, many thanks to all those that voted!
David.
5 comments:
Sadly the trend in Australia seems to be one of being completely out of sync with the voting public, mostly driven by advisors with only their interests at heart. We do though need a way to balance the input into Standards development. That would involve financial compensation to those involved and perhaps the private companies that employ them, so that the 'community of volunteers' is made up of more than a select few who can or cannot afford for their selfish needs not to be implemented. The Standards world needs a community of knowledgable inderviduals in order for complex issues to be viewed from a range of considerations. They also need time for considered analysis, forced marches and tiger teams is not the answer, that was just silly idea driven by some newly discovered words, probably driven by 'the we need Agile' but I have no idea what the actually takes mistake
I think the volunteer standards development is a better model and if standards were actually enforced then people would find the time to participate. What we have now is standards development for hire, and guess what they always want to do something big and new.
Standards can take decades, as the quality of software support for the standards by vendors takes years to mature and new standards just create new, often as yet, unknown, problems. By the time they are finished the technology has moved on and they are considered old hat before they are even used. Trendy technology choices have no place in healthcare.
The HL7V2 standards still, by any measure, have the lions share of success stories and if the government actually insisted on compliance (Which is now with the reach of vendors and is cheap for government) we would actually have something that worked and we could build on it. Waiting for something new is folly. Paid standards development is folly. We need people with skin in the game who care about the outcome, and have some real technical ability, and a code base to maintain, to step up, and a requirement for compliance would ensure that.
Standards Australia has been destroyed by political interference so not sure where that table would live however. ??HL7 Australia
The government should be totally and wholly behind international standards, Just like they did with OSI/GOSIP. That really made the difference.
Which is why we have a world of TCP/IP crap and all its insecurities, failures, faults and limitations.
Neither standards or the IETF mantra of "just make it work" have been a long term success.
However neither GOSIP or TCP/IP have killed people. Bad eHealth standards and implementations could do just that.
It's going to be a long slow journey, with the PCEHR being the white elephant in the room.
Of course, they could make it Opt-Out, which will shine a bright light on the uselessness and high cost of the white elephant. A light they may regret shinning.
I see the rumours I had been hearing are true, Dr Stephen Chu has parted company with NEHTA and moved to QLD Health. There must be something rotten going on for Dr Chu to resign, he was one of the most insightful and dedicated persons in eHealth I have had the pleasure to meet.
NEHTA has lost a lot of credibility with this loss
Anonymous 7:34am. I am not surprised, during my time at NEHTA there was clearly moves to ease people like this out of the business. There is a nasty form of bullying by some within the technical ranks and god help you if you are smarter than those in charge, your questioning of design choices and approaches are seen as direct challenges to a cowboys authority rather than for the good intensions they were based on.
Sadly we see a brian drian from NEHTA, the distruction of standards when there was an oppertunity to strengthen SA, no architecture and a company driftingnwithout a strategy, just random acts of services the DHS should be running.
Post a Comment