Actually, Siemens Healthineers could do three things:
1. Style transfer from one standard to another. Would a particular history have resulted in this FHIR v5 data when it was written under FHIR v4?
2. The ability to incorporate feedback for de-identification. In court, that must be explained as an accidental parallel construction rather than an oversight flaunting GDPR; or worse, a hallucination substituting in training data. Siemens could build a product that proves so.
3. Automatically cache pre-filled chronologies. This is easier than the other two, and what I’d expect lands on someone’s desk. By pre-forming the (usually expensive) paralegal material, a doctor or administrator can preview the legal case they’re up against. And alternatively, a plaintiff can claim that a hospital or doctor was aware of the risk of a pre-existing condition. Siemens mostly speaks in risk.
1. Style transfer from one standard to another. Would a particular history have resulted in this FHIR v5 data when it was written under FHIR v4?
2. The ability to incorporate feedback for de-identification. In court, that must be explained as an accidental parallel construction rather than an oversight flaunting GDPR; or worse, a hallucination substituting in training data. Siemens could build a product that proves so.
3. Automatically cache pre-filled chronologies. This is easier than the other two, and what I’d expect lands on someone’s desk. By pre-forming the (usually expensive) paralegal material, a doctor or administrator can preview the legal case they’re up against. And alternatively, a plaintiff can claim that a hospital or doctor was aware of the risk of a pre-existing condition. Siemens mostly speaks in risk.