That's a great link, Paul, and thanks for adding it to the pile, as it were. I for one hadn't seen that before, and I look forward to going through it later.
Many of us are aware that a few (perhaps more) people "out there" are actively pursuing the kind of practices we like to talk about here, but we don't always get to hear much about what they are up to, unfortunately.
I may as well make this little plug:- contributions (that is, posts) to this forum cost nothing (except a few minutes - usually - of anyone's time). But the
missive then gets a viewing, and an airing, all across the world. It also gets published, shall we say, instantly, and presents itself (literally in open forum) for immediate comment, feedback, and ... er, rebuttal.
A form of true democracy, then, in the proper biomed style (that is, peer review ... usually with a bit of
banter thrown in).
On the other hand, "learned societies and institutes* ... " (I'll leave you all to draw your own conclusions).
*
Needless to say (and as mentioned before) I personally ditched all that stuff (and all those subscriptions) many years ago. I can't see what's wrong with the free exchange of information, as practised by many on this forum.After-note:- having just gone through Paul Robbins' excellent paper ... yes, it would be nice to see the illustrations. Especially Figure 7 (if nothing else). Another thought that I picked up was this one (to paraphrase):-
Perhaps it's the user that needs maintenance, rather than the device! Yes, indeed. And this is, I would suggest, the perspective from which to look at hospital-based equipment maintenance, anyway. That is, from the point of view of the needs of the user, and are these needs being met?
