Search for Comments

Order By
in order

63 comments.

List of comments
RespondentResponse DateDetails
«anonymous»

Comment on Clinical Information Standards Specification Phase 3: Enhancing commissioning flows

  • Comment ID: 66
This change has the potential to completely destabilise income flows by the introduction of an incredibly granular set of terms (SNOMED) which if not aggregated through a new form of HRG software would make commissioning unworkable. Providers and commissioners would not be able to practically contract and commission at that level of detail. It is not practical or desirable to provide tariffs at this level of granularity.
«anonymous»

Comment on Clinical Information Standards Specification Procedure Classification Current status

  • Comment ID: 65
OPCS is never fit for purpose and never will. Currently it has been hinderance to move NHS data standards forward. Just ask the clinciansn how many are using OPCS codes to support their clicnal work, plesae noted, clinical. That is essentially what NHS is for.
«anonymous»

Comment on Clinical Information Standards Specification dm+d Key enablers

  • Comment ID: 64
This whole concept has been presented in such a long-winded, complex way it surprises me that the powers that be think the majority of the public will understand the proposals. I do not trust the NHS with my data, their track record is abysmal. The organisation is completely untrustworthy in this regard. I will never consent.
«anonymous»

Comment on Clinical Information Standards Specification Figure 1: Patient information flow in the health and care system

  • Comment ID: 63
"Our vision of a 'learning ecosystem' treats the information recorded by health practitioners as an essential resource of the health and care system rather than a mere byproduct." I doubt any health professional has the time to record health information that will merely be a "byproduct". It is recorded because it is relevant to the care of the patient. If it is not relevant, it is unlikely to be recorded. Secondary uses are generally perceived to be a byproduct of process of recording data for i
«anonymous»

Comment on Clinical Information Standards Specification Overview of Clinical Information Standards

  • Comment ID: 62
The overriding shift that needs to take place is moving from coding for financial reasons to coding for patient care and service design reasons. Too much of the data work that takes place in the NHS is for financial and performance reasons compared to patient care and service design. Most data/analytics teams are in finance/performance and this drives their activity. Clearly performance/finance should be part of their work, but service improvement, patient care, etc. should be the majority. The
«anonymous»

Comment on Clinical Information Standards Specification Phase 3: Enhancing commissioning flows

  • Comment ID: 61
Any use of personal data will require explicit consent at the point of collection. Granular data should not be required by commissioners, except in statistical terms.
«anonymous»

Comment on Clinical Information Standards Specification Figure 1: Patient information flow in the health and care system

  • Comment ID: 60
There is no way I will ever grant policymakers access to any of my personal data unless it is FULLY ANONYMISED. This includes location data which should not be detailed enough for reversal of the psuedo-anonymisation process to be even remotely possible. If necessary, I will inform my GP and any clinician with whom I interact, that they should not even record my data on a computer system!
«anonymous»

Comment on Clinical Information Standards Specification The vision for NHS Clinical Information Standards

  • Comment ID: 59
Access to data by clinicians for clinical purposes is necessary for efficient and effective care and explicit opt-in consent MUST be gained for any data processing and sharing. However, access by any other groups, as listed above, should be to FULLY ANONYMISED DATA ONLY. Pseudo-anonymisation is not acceptable as it has proven possible to reverse-engineer using external data sources, linking this to actual people. In addition, sharing of this data, and access to it would only be acceptable if fu
«anonymous»

Comment on Clinical Information Standards Specification Overview of Clinical Information Standards

  • Comment ID: 58
If this proposal was at all honest it would state that the aim of the exercise is to grab as much raw data as possible so that it can then be sold to big pharma and so be used to offset the cost of the NHS to the taxpayer as per the ideological aims of the libertarian right. Everything else in this is just typical NHS management babble -pretending to explain but actually obfuscating the real intent. As an aside, why is this supposedly public comment area hosted on an obscure non NHS platform -
«anonymous»

Comment on Clinical Information Standards Specification Overview of Clinical Information Standards

  • Comment ID: 57
I have news for you Nick - throwing mud at a wall doeen't work as you should know from the likes of NHSpfIT, Care.data etc. as well as the fact that existing patient data is accessed illegally within the NHS. As with other programmes, there won't be a proper risk assessment and billions will be wasted. This time listen to the experts.
Next pageLast page

Actions