The 23 academics who wrote to Parliament outlining their concerns about the progress of the National Programme for IT have set up a wiki to track media reports and act as a resource for NHS IT.
The NHS 23 wiki, available at http://editthis.info/nhs_it_info/, features links to articles tracking problems with various suppliers and coverage of the academics’ open letter and the agreed statement. It was developed over the past few months as a resource and reference tool for those interested in the progress of National Programme for IT (NPfIT).
Ross Anderson, professor of security engineering at the Computer Laboratory at the University of Cambridge and one of the 23 academics, told E-Health Insider: "This is something that we have developed for our own use over the last few months. We have finally decided to make it publicly visible."
The wiki contains links to articles by E-Health Insider and other publications collected under themes, as well as primary sources such as relevant official records of Parliament, NPfIT specifications and policies and reports relating to the National Audit Office and Public Accounts Committee investigations.
"This ever-growing set of quotations give just one side of the case, so to speak – no doubt a number of alternative published articles relating to NPfIT could be selected that would paint a somewhat rosier picture," says the wiki.
In April this year, the 23 academics wrote to the House of Commons health select committee, which was investigating NPfIT, calling for an independent review of the programme covering its architecture, design and treatment of data.
Later that month, Connecting for Health (CfH) met with the academics and agreed that a "constructive and pragmatic" review of the programme would be valuable.
The wiki seeks to clarify the academics’ own position on the progress of CfH and the call for a review. According to Professor Anderson, the agreement which CfH and the experts arrived at in the meeting that followed their letter was posted on the agency’s site with a small but crucial omission, which he argues changed the meaning.
After the first edit, Anderson explained that the agreement was once again altered and republished at a later, unknown date. The academics’ wiki contains all three versions of the statement including the one that they say was the original agreed by the two parties.
Professor Anderson stressed that the wiki was intended to be a reference point and not a campaigning platform, and was similar to the links and articles posted on the Foundation for Information Policy Research site.
‘Wikis’ are online reference pages that can be edited and updated by readers – either by the general public or through a password-protected interface. The NHS 23 wiki is publicly viewable and is edited and maintained a number of the academics.
Links