Nevertheless, it’s worth pointing out a few that didn’t make the cut: David Van Sickle’s open spirometer project for respitory diseases, my own Open Prosthetics Project (which includes an open electronic hardware effort), and the Open EEG Project, to name a few.

I think that David is right. We do need to develop a repository or commons where effort and information on these things can be centralized. At a recent Open Hardware Conference I attended, we discussed exactly that, but the efforts are still in the planning stages. It is only through success in organizing these efforts and encouraging the activation effort required to get past the potential barrier (to use a chemistry metaphor), that we can move these projects from the theoretical/hype to the practical/successful column. For some patient populations, this may be the only way that real change and progress begins to occur.

http://www.osirix-viewer.com

THE PROBLEM HERE IS THAT IT SEEMS EGADSS WAS NEVER SUCCESSFULLY IMPLEMENTED EVEN AT THE FAMILY PRACTICE THAT PROMOTED IT (McMasters University Department of Family Medicine). There is no mention of it in the 2007 to 2008 McMasters Family Medicine report, nor can I find any evidence that ANY healthcare organization is using it. Perhaps someone could enlighten me on this.
The last trace of EGADSS that I can find is in 2007 about some update to the code.
BOTTOM LINE QUESTION: Is there any real world implementation of EGADSS where it is being used as a regular part of a clinician’s workflow?
Another question: Is it currently supported by any individual or organization that is continuing its maturation as more healthcare IT standards emerge? If the answers to the above questions is NO,, then putting EGADSS on the list as “successful” makes one wonder as to the credibility of some of the other references.

James OConnor MD

Take a look on Medical: “Objective rovide an universal Electronic Medical Record (EMR), so doctors and institutions all over the world, independently of their economic status, will benefit from a centralized, high quality, secure and scalable system.”

Open Source : Licensed under GPL v3

http://medical.sourceforge.net/

If any of them cater to proprietary data formats, proprietary software and not open data formats than they are falsely advertising that they are open source when they are not; thus pseudo open source.

Let’s call it like it is, their are software applications available right now, today that will let 100% of users see the web content on your website, regardless of the operating system (OS) on the computer or the browser being used. Do you use them? Do you recommend them?

If I am using a Mac, Unix or Linux for my OS and not using Internet Explorer as my browser, can I see your content without Adobe or Microsoft applications? Why not?

If I do not want to enable Java and/or JavaScript can I still view your website? If not there are plenty of other options where I can go for my content.

Do you require software and/or data formats covered under a software or hardware patent in order to see your content? If so then you are NOT supporting open source and open data formats.

Does your install process require proprietary software covered under proprietary patents? Does your install process require a person to update a proprietary OS? Both scenarios are FAILS!

Let’s make the web 100% viewable by everyone, regardless of which OS or browser they prefer! That is the best way and is fair to everyone, even the proprietary companies that will not return the favor.

Who is being a better net citizen?

Do y’all know about Open Mobile Health Exchange (OMHE)? Its an open source micro-format for sending simple medical info such as blood pressure.

Its for use with services like Twitter and SMS, and also provides a format for medical device output.