FW: USHIK and the HAVE standard

FYI – below are additional comments on HAVE. 

 

Sukumar

 

 

From:
 [mailto:] 

Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007
12:57 PM

To: Sukumar
 Dwarkanath

Subject: Re: USHIK and the HAVE
standard

 

 

Sukumar,

I never received a posting login; did you receive the message below I sent
directly to you?  it was also sent directly to the listserv, but probably
didn't get through; it didn't bounce, though.

 

Tx,

 

Laura

 

 

>Sukumar

 

> I've registered for the list
but have not had a confirmation so I'm forwarding the comments to you as
well.  IF the confirmation comes through tomorrow morning, I'll post it
then.

 

>Notes: -Typo in value of
BedType:OpeatingRooms has been corrected to OperatingRooms                                               
-Typo (?) in EMSAirTransportStatus >and  EMSAmbulanceStatus Comments:
repeated phrase: average
offload                                     

>-ClinicalStatus attribute in
Figure 1 appears to be ClinicalOperations element in Data Dictionary (page 48)
(which is
>correct?)                                                   

>-CommentText is not used
directly by Hospital, as claimed in CommentText
element.     Correct?                

>-OBGYN Class has an OBGYN
element - the only duplicate name in the model.    Is
this intended?                      

>-The bolding of element names
in the dictionary has been preserved in the spreadsheet.  There is no
apparent pattern to the bolding.    Does the bolding carry
>any
meaning?                 

>-The element EOCStatus has two
permissible values, but no value meanings.  Value meanings for the purpose
of USHIK and the ISO/IEC 11179 standards are a >name and definition of what
the values represent.

 

>Thanks,

>Laura Reece, Ph.D.

 

>USHIK Project Team