Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 9 years ago
Perhaps we also need 'Prognostic intent' on this list? It would be good to be
able to link each intent to its corresponding process (therapy, diagnostic
process, prevention process). Can we leverage any of the OBI planned process
or plan specification content here (establishing how intent relates to these)?
In what do these intents inhere? It seems to me like these are related to
'ways' of doing something...so, w/o dependent occurents, we may have to subtype
processes, P > Therapeutic P, Diagnostic P, Preventative P"
Thoughts?
Original comment by albertgo...@gmail.com
on 5 May 2011 at 2:34
It looks like obi:IAO_0000005 objective specification may work for diagnostic
process (and prognostic process), where the process endpoints are well defined:
objective specification = a directive information entity that describes an
intended process endpoint. When part of a plan specification the concretization
is realized in a planned process in which the bearer tries to effect the world
so that the process endpoint is achieved.
So would be good to have 'diganostic objective specification'. But not sure
what to do about therapeutic or preventative...since these seem to be
open-ended processes...maybe OBI's 'material maintenance objective spec', but
that would be a stretch.
Original comment by albertgo...@gmail.com
on 5 May 2011 at 2:48
My first reaction is that "prognostic intent" is not something we talk much
about clinically, and indeed a Google search on "prognostic intent" returns 32
hits.
My first thought is that intents inhere in people (and possibly other
higher-level organisms). But we write them down (but that's true of a lot of
things) and we build things with the intent that they be used certain ways
(i.e., we create furosemide tablets with the therapeutic intent of treating
heart failure).
I am not sure what you are saying about processes and specfications. Why do we
need "diagnostic objective specification"
Original comment by hoga...@gmail.com
on 5 May 2011 at 7:06
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
sivaram....@gmail.com
on 2 Dec 2010 at 10:33