[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnumed-devel] address@hidden: Announcing the Portal]

From: Richard Terry
Subject: Re: [Gnumed-devel] address@hidden: Announcing the Portal]
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2004 09:19:43 +1000
User-agent: KMail/1.5.4

Comment of merging duplicate files or mislabelled files.

My gut reaction is the doctor should have the final say on the merging, and do 
this is manually (with audit trail of course), but would think the computer 
should also be programmed to automatically pick  up actual or potential 
duplications, and put a prompt somewhere for us to inspect and  do the actual 
merging by choice. 

Some sections of gnumed will be subject to more errors in this regard - 
especially downloaded results from various sources - e.g hospital pathology, 
private etc. 

In my experience it is extremely rare in general practice to have duplicated 
front-end demographic records, but does occur  - my secretaries do put in 
wrong DOB or spell firstnames/surnames wrongly, and then can't find the 
patient who presents next time so create another entry.

 It is much commoner in my practice but still not frequent ? every week or so, 
that I get say pathology records where they have entered an incorrect 
name/address, or have the same patient at two different addresses as 
different patients. I find this extremely annoying as I cannot view 
cumulative results, or find results I know I've ordered.

I'd put this as a non-critical TODO.

After all, we can't even enter a patient's name into gnuMed, nor records, so 
merging them isn't a high priority.



On Wed, 1 Sep 2004 03:26 am, Karsten Hilbert wrote:
> > deduplication  using febrl or similiar batch processing might require
> > gnumed to have a cron scheduled task,
> That's what I always imagined to be taken care of by a data
> integrity demon (a bit like pg_autovacuum). Something cron
> calls every hour or so which processes a number of tests/tasks
> the calls of which are again defined in some config file.
> > febrl might have a role in import of  multi-clinic -attending patients'
> > records (i.e.  linkage) as well.
> Yes.
> > on the other hand,  manual opportunistic merging of found duplicated
> > records during patient search is an old favorite, and requires no
> > background processing time.
> Richard, what's your opinion ?  Anyone want to take this up ?
> At the very least it is a TODO item.
> Karsten

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]