mukoya wrote on Saturday, March 26, 2011:
Came across the page below while clicking around on the net. This is a gentleman assessing EMRs for use in his country. He evaluated 2.9 1n 2009.
http://clearlyobscure.com/node/4
OEMR 4.0 has achieved certification alright, it has also achieved much more. I guess he will have a different story about our UI should he come back.
Thanks to all.
mike-h30 wrote on Saturday, March 26, 2011:
Maybe he’ll show some love for OpenEMR 4.0. Talk about a brutal review. Regardless, we jumped onboard way back at 2.83 and it improved efficiency in our office immediately, even with “a GUI only a mother could love.”
Congrats everyone!
mukoya wrote on Saturday, March 26, 2011:
One thing even he confessed back then was that the functionality was great and balanced his dislike for the UI. I guess OEMR has since taken quite a leap both functionally and aesthetically.
aethelwulffe wrote on Thursday, March 31, 2011:
I think he was basically tits-on. He was correct. It was (and still is just a bit) “Engineer Ugly”. He should have given marks for deployability, and the fact that it is a web interface, where all the pretty non-frame-based emrs like AmazingCharts are only accessable from outside a network via RDP, and require you to copy the database and re-integrate it if you take the emr on the road. Aside from that, the interface has always been the weak selling point. It seems like each time a new feature is added, we have a nice bit of well thought out code, and an interface that uses incomprehensible terms and is often poorly executed. I feel that the road to making usable software is to first design the interface elements and figure out how it LOOKS…THEN create the code that performs the functions. Functions need to follow form. There is only one reason that cars do not all have a mid-engine chassis, and that is due to the fact that someone has to be able sit in it and drive. Too often folks jump into the meat of the problem, get the function taken care of and then treat the interface as if it were merely gravy instead of the fork.
mukoya wrote on Thursday, March 31, 2011:
I believe we have a very capable developer community that can put together great functionality. Some of us who are actual practicing doctors will try to chip in whenever possible regarding UI and usability. I like the way the project is run. It is easily the most “open source” project i have been part of.
Already I can see jcahn, Tony, Dr. Bowen on the right path regarding UI and workflow/usability issues on a thread 'Encounter layout" below. I agree with them and I am awaiting Tony’s mockup to comment.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/openemr/forums/forum/202504/topic/4434747
Confession: One of the first things I look for is a screenshot If impressed, I can then dive into the functionality. If not, I will probably move on.
That is how i gave up on GNUmed and a host of other EMRs including OEMR 3.2. I only probed OEMR further when I saw 4.0 looking promising in the looks department. It is then that I discovered its power.
Mukoya.