[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Gnumed-devel] state of test results handling

From: James Busser
Subject: Re: [Gnumed-devel] state of test results handling
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 21:14:26 -0700

When I had suggested...

On 31-Mar-08, at 6:59 PM, James Busser wrote:
The easiest implementation, however, may be to copy into the signed indicator the same value as was supplied by the test_org (in those cases where the clinician confirms the test_org's indicator) as it might be complicated and a lot of work to have the clinician setting different kinds of technical abnormality flags for different cells... unless we unify them all with a simple asterisk?

I had not taken into account that on 31-Mar-08, at 1:19 AM, Karsten Hilbert wrote:
- if you or the reviewer said "abnormal" show the labs
  indicator if there is any or else show "!"

In regard to the possibility of italics for technical abnormality, maybe such visual emphasis should only be when there had not yet been any review, because a reviewer would have the opportunity to decide clinical significance, and if this was lacking from something technically abnormal, then the technical abnormality did not continue to deserve emphasis.

For reviewer-confirmed technical abnormalities, the asterisk (*) would seem to give less emphasis, and to be less perpetually distracting, than an exclamation (!).

Maybe "!" would be useful for the small subset of tests where the test-org had issued a *comment*

  there is a FIXME to make the latter "+" or "-"
  depending on available range information

the FIXME sounds like it would still be useful, even for results that were not clinically significant, especially for tests with which the clinician is less familiar. OTOH, in this event, the clinican would probably need to look inside the tooltip anyway, for the reference range, so maybe there would be nothing lost if we did not bother with + -

reply via email to

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