Re: [Gnumed-devel] design comment: prescription/drug ID

[Ian Haywood]

On Sat, 10 Apr 2004 18:04:46 +0200
Karsten Hilbert <address@hidden> wrote:
> > and a nice fusion of recording and performing clinical actions (a dichotomy 
> > we do not need to inherit from the paper system)
> I understand the desirability to not inherit useless
> dichotomies but I am not so sure that I understand where you
> see the fusion here avoiding such a dichotomy ?

My point (not made clearly), is that with a separate notes widget we are 
flicking from the notes widget to record our inital impression,
then over to the editareas to "do" stuff: prescribe, refer, whatever: as we do 
on paper.

[quoting gnumed/client/doc/TODO/developer-guide.txt]

> The goal is to make most any data available via some placeholder.
Yes, good concept.

> symbolic: $symb:PATIENT_LAST_NAME$
> SQL: $SQL:identity.PUPIC$
Not sure, IMO better to use the business layer via the below method.
> pure Python: $eval:my_fancy_method('a', 3)$
> Gnumedlets: $gmlet:my_gnumedlet.py$
We need to clarify the local namespace these Python snippets operate in. It 
would make sense
to define a few things (the "symbolic" as above) as local variables. (So, 
"eval" and "symb" domains can be folded into one.)

> does the updated get_names() in gmDemographicRecord satisfy
> the needs of gmForms.send_referral() adequately ?
yes, except "title" is missing.
Here in Melbourne we still have a few old surgeons who demand "Mr." I know, I 
work for them ;-)

Ian                                                                             
            





-- 
PGP public key E750652E at wwwkeys.pgp.net
9BF0 67B7 F84F F7EE 0C42  C063 28FC BC52 E750 652E

pgpTLwwqMTNGB.pgp
Description: PGP signature