[Top][All Lists]

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

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

From: Karsten Hilbert
Subject: Re: [Gnumed-devel] state of test results handling
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 15:57:53 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14)

On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 06:59:22PM -0700, James Busser wrote:

> Clinician-verified technical abnormality could *potentially* unify the 
> indicators.
> 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...
As far as the clinician is concerned it is a simple yes/no
flag. We concern ourselves with decisions only and let the
lab do the grunt work :-)

> Are we entertaining the visual indication of technical abnormality only 
> by a symbol in the padding, as I am wondering if italics could be helpful 
> for those
Well, either or but not both. Personally, I'd favor a symbol
such that to preserve changes in appearance (slant, pitch,
weight, color) for significance. Which Jim formerly attested
to not wanting to be signalled at all (?), however.

GPG key ID E4071346 @
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD  4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346

reply via email to

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