Many countries use DHIS2 as a significant component of the overall health information ecosystem, expanding their use of DHIS2 across HMIS and numerous health programs, as well as connecting with various additional technologies to create a comprehensive infrastructure. This session will take a look at how we approach the concept of interoperability and integration, and discuss how DHIS2 as a platform is often situated within the broader health information system paradigm.
You can post your questions ahead of, during, or after the session. Our speakers will check this thread for questions, and select some for responding to in the session, or follow up after the session has ended. Feel free to respond to other questions or add to them if you have something to follow up with.
Regarding the topic of “what is DHIS2?”, I like to think of it as a Primary Health Care platform rather than fitting into the more classical boxes of HMIS, EPR etc. Which means it should support a broad range of PHC activities through aggregate data support, register support, inventory support, etc. The point is that health care activities are more important than information system classifications
“Principle 4. Don’t start with the vendors of systems” ?? Does DHIS2 classify as a vendor, and if not, why not? Answers: From @Knut_Staring: @Mweene, certainly the team behind DHIS2 is a kind of vendor, but I thought the point is to emphasize that our engagement should not concentrate on a global, systems focus, but root the interoperability discussion in country needs
Vendors are more commercial. There are DHIS2 vendors that offer DHIS2 as a service. UiO is the Platform Owner in that we produce the core product and define the boundary resources that others use to extend the core
Not mainly vendor to vendor
Another thought on the vendor topic from the Univ of Oslo perspective – as much as possible, we try not to be the ones doing or supporting the implementation. Our goal has always been to enable countries to own and manage their own system. So in many places, you would never even hear our perspective about what and who to connect with, because the person representing “DHIS2” is actually the MOH, or one of the regionally run HISP groups.
From Joy K:
I assume these principles apply to interoperability where we’re asking the central DHIS2 team (at UiO) to be involved, vs. leveraging the APIs to connect individual systems with DHIS2?
@ Joy I believe some of these principles are applicable to inform any interoperability initiatives (e.g. identifying value to the users and working with data users from the beginning, determining cost benefit…)