Re: [Gnumed-devel] need-to-know change to backend

[J Busser]

At 11:46 PM +0200 9/17/04, Karsten Hilbert wrote:
> <SNIP>
> One thing I learned in discussion with Marc Verbeke was that
> our (my) current idea of where the problem list is to be
> located conceptually or IOW what a clin_health_issue is in
> GnuMed needs a bit of review. I eventually decided to slightly
> relax the association between episode and health issue:
>
> <SNIP>
> Commentary please !

Sorry it has taken 2 months to act on this.

The current construct suits me better, I think it more flexible and 
natural, as Karsten himself opined.

I have knocked together a wiki page from the above and the 
predecessor thread from June 29 - mid July ("need assessment from 
fellow clinicians"). The wiki page URL is appended... its bottom 
portion contains some extra items I have yet to clean up. Still on my 
to do list is to add a section on the soAp / AOE discussion.

> The "problem list" is a view over issues and episodes
> selectable by is_active and is_significant.

BTW a reminder that is_significant has become clinically_relevant

Recently Richard commented that the "tree" of  table items was not 
well-suited to assist SOAP note input, would the "problem list" 
construct be a more useful component for an encounter/notes GUI?

Here's the URL for the new page on the wiki:
http://hherb.com/cgi-bin/twiki/view/Gnumed/ClinHealthIssue