Talk:Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources

Contested deletion
This page is not unambiguously promotional, because...


 * HL7's other standards (like HL7 CDA, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinical_Document_Architecture) are well established and also present on Wikipedia.
 * The FHIR standard, although still in development, is likely to be adopted by other standards bodies like DICOM (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DICOM) and IHE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrating_the_Healthcare_Enterprise)
 * FHIR, and health standards in general, are designed to be around for decades, so are more than a passing product.
 * FHIR, not being a product, but an agreed-upon exchange standard, does not need promotion, since it will be part of HL7's body of standards and thus adopted by the member states
 * The article tries to explain the why of its existence, its basic design principles and current state of development, not promote HL7.
 * This standard will go into public use from Q2 2013, after which a broad audience will encounter it and will expect this new world-wide standard to be present on Wikipedia.

Some background on the HL7 organization:

(note that the above comment was added 2012-09-21T11:38:10‎ by 89.98.52.199)
 * HL7, the organization that produces FHIR, is a not-for-profit, ANSI-accredited standards developing organization.
 * The FHIR standard is a free, open standard.
 * HL7 covers the needs of a broad audience in healthcare: 2,300+ members, including approximately 500 corporate members who represent more than 90% of the information systems vendors serving healthcare.
 * HL7 is run by volunteers and has been making standards, like FHIR, since 1987.

New article created, based on widespread reporting and interest and great significance
I'm surprised that the previous article was deleted speedily, despite material defending it on the talk page. But it was very new then, and perhaps the "contest" of speedy deletion was not done fully according to the right procedures. I'm also surprised that none of that material was even copied to the HL7 page. But at this point, with widespread media coverage and support by influential committees and government bodies, it seems unambiguously worthy of an article. ★NealMcB★ (talk) 04:44, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 one external links on Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141228095815/http://www.hl7.org/implement/standards/product_brief.cfm?product_id=343 to http://www.hl7.org/implement/standards/product_brief.cfm?product_id=343
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141228100113/http://www.hl7.org/documentcenter/public_temp_B669E2A2-1C23-BA17-0C7A999023268366/pressreleases/HL7_PRESS_20141204.pdf to http://www.hl7.org/documentcenter/public_temp_B669E2A2-1C23-BA17-0C7A999023268366/pressreleases/HL7_PRESS_20141204.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141220063122/http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=Open_Source_FHIR_implementations to http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=Open_Source_FHIR_implementations

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:23, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Cerner promotion?
The cited article that mentions Cerner's support for FHIR cites other EHRs in the same sentence. Singling out Cerner as a pillar of interoperability seems disingenuous and inappropriate. Suggest changing to "by multiple electronic health record vendors which value its open and extensible nature." Not for nothing, but the article doesn't substantiate the claim that Cerner (or any other vendor) values anything. Ctu9964 (talk) 15:49, 24 October 2018 (UTC)