Talk:Health Informatics Service Architecture

Untitled
Article created to provide additional information on EHR standards in the EU. Pvosta 19:50, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
 * This article is on interoperability, not on EHR as such. Pvosta 19:55, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Article updated with ISO information. Sharna Smith (talk) 07:12, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

As part of an assignment being undertaken for Health Informatics C, LaTrobe University, I will be updating the article on Health Informatics Service Architecture (HISA).

At this stage, the plan is to update the article with information on the following:
 * Development of the standard
 * How was it developed
 * Who was involved in the development
 * Why was it developed, how was the need for the standard identified.


 * The intent of the standard
 * How the standard works
 * The issues the standard addresses
 * Any aspects of the integration and interoperability of electronic health records that the standard does not address.


 * The impact of the standard
 * The impact that the standard is currently having
 * The potential impact that the standard may have into the future.

This is just a brief (and broad) summary of what I think the article will contain. Sharna Smith (talk) 11:27, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Peer Review Comments

1. Quality of Writing

The spelling and grammar is of a high standard. The article is easy to read and understand. The article is objective and well organised

2. Use of references

There has been a number of references used for this article from a variety of sources. The references are of high quality

3. Content/information

The information provided covers the topic and uses clear explanations. There has been extensive research of the topic. There are links to other Wikipedia articles for more information.

4. Format/layout

The article has been divided into sections with well-planned headings. This makes it is easy to find information. The article has also been well-planned so that the appearance is attractive. The font is appropriate and there is plenty of space between sections- the reader isn't confronted by solid blocks of text.

5. Possible sections for improvement: Explanations of terms RICHE, NUCLEUS, EDITH and HANSA or links to explanations. Suzanne Lois Robson (talk) 10:11, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Peer Review
The article is very well written and is an easy to read objective piece. Internal and external links are good. Spelling and grammer is good. Sections of the article are good, the formatting of these could possibly be reviewed and subsections created if necessary. The references used are of good quality, more references would be useful if applicable. Links or definitions of acronyms may also be useful. TessVague (talk) 20:41, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Page finalisation
Page content, formatting etc finalised for submission as part of HIM5IHC. Sharna Smith (talk) 07:32, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment
This article is the subject of an educational assignment at La Trobe University supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program&#32;during the 2013 Q1 term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from by PrimeBOT (talk) on 16:06, 2 January 2023 (UTC)