Re: [Gnumed-devel] Re: address@hidden: Immunisation edit area question]

[Richard Terry]

Good, I'm glad you agree on the concept of allowing generated data + comment. 
I think it is a very workable concept.

BTW as you know I trashed my machine, but I can't download gnuMed yet, the 
server seems still down.

I have one huge disappointment with my Libranet Debian - It is so complete, 
functions so well, so many apps, that I've no need to play with apt-get 
install!!!!!! What a bummer. Been hunting for an excuse but can't find one.

Richard


On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 12:38 pm, Karsten Hilbert wrote:
> > > > How are we to handle this ? Do we just assume that whenever we
> > > > enter a new vaccination we mean the one that comes next
> >
> > This is just what I did, with a popup reminder message a la png
> > attatched. I've found this works simply and well, one can tell what the
> > overall vaccine status is from the lists, and the system can analyse what
> > is missing from the database.
> >
> > However there are other solutions, depending on what the group wants. For
> > example the editing area could contain an extra line for the sequence
> > number in a primary vaccine + a check box if it was a booster.
>
> I'd say let's combine the approaches: add a seq no line and a
> booster check box so the user can explicitely say what she
> wants to record AND make the system use it's internal
> knowledge:
>
> 1) init the fields with values meaningful for the data already
>    in the database
> 2) warn on seemingly duplicate vaccinations
> 3) ask if "missing" (ie not recorded) vaccinations should be
>    approximated and recorded upon recording an entered
>    vaccination
>
> > There is of course a much more difficult problem, that of recording which
> > vaccines have already taken place, but that you didn't personally give.
>
> Which could be handled via 3) above. A note on the generated
> nature of the data is placed in the clinical comment associated
> with the vaccination. I don't mind provided the comment clearly says
> that the date is generated. We aren't up to the level of
> OpenEHR yet :-)
>
> Karsten