Do you think Microsoft Windows 95 is "up to date with federal regulations"?
Keeping something up to a standard that is not yet defined is not and will never be guaranteed in any software, whether it is proprietary or open source.
This also implies that you have to hire developers in order to maintain open-source health information software.
As the chief information officer of a major medical system, Becky Magee is using Linux somewhere in her infrastructure. But I seriously doubt that Magee employs even one Linux Kernel developer.
This kind of smart-sounding business drivel is frustrating to those of us who are actually working to provide low-cost freedom-respecting software to the rest of the world. If you say to me "VA VistA does not encrypt passwords according to the rules found in HIPAA/ARRA" we can have a meaningful discussion about whether that is true (it is not, by the way) and if it is a valid criticism, I know exactly what I need to do with my time to fix the problem. "Does not keep up with federal standards" is a blanket implication that is neither useful nor valid.
Magee might have a valid issue that she is actually dealing with in her world, but when throwing out these kinds of statements, she is substantially lowering the quality of the discourse about this issue. I would love to hear from her exactly what federal requirements are not met by a particular open-source electronic health-record project.
Liberty Health Software FoundationHouston
What do you think? Submit a letter to Your Views. Please include your name, title, company and hometown. Health IT Strategist reserves the right to edit all submissions.
Also, please share your thoughts by taking our latest HITS reader poll.