@schuemie These chapters represent natural divisions of OHDSI resources. That makes sense and has a lot to recommend it. It allows the related materials already developed for each resource to be easily brought to bear on its chapter. I think that is an important advantage.
Another way to organize the book could be to reflect the process of going from initial interest in OHDSI to becoming a fully participating member that derives great value from participation. Chapters might cover the initial work of getting a resource stood up, learning about the community, starting to evaluate and use the resource, … developing collaborations, leading a study… publishing results.
In that structure different aspects of each OHDSI resource would be highlighted in the chapter devoted to that stage of the process. The community, for example, plays a role at each stage of that journey, as does data characterization.
A journey structure might more easily use examples that carry through the book. Examples could be more than a study. There could be a set of examples that reflect prototypical person + institution + motivation scenarios. A journey structure also might more naturally demonstrate the functional relationships among OHDSI components and makes their purpose and value clear.
The same materials for each resources would still be provided, but in a context that is focused on the needs and activities at a different stage of involvement. That might be especially helpful to newer or prospective community members and might be less helpful to more experienced members who just want to look things up. I doubt the drawbacks for the latter group would be significant.
A more significant potential drawback to a journey structure might be a greater need for new material development: writing up how people in different roles at different institutions become involved, get resources stood up, identify how OHDSI helps meet their needs, use OHDSI to meet those needs, etc. Its possible that could be very valuable new material, but it would almost certainly slow the pace of writing the book.
Some of that additional work would be required of any illustration of an example that persists throughout the book. But structuring the book around that journey would almost demand more new material about people in different roles at different types of institutions with different reasons for participation.
Even if there are benefits like the ones I ascribe to the journey structure, it might not be better than the structure you proposed or might not be enough of an improvement to justify the additional work. So I’m not advocating for it, just proposing it as food for thought.