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

[James Busser]

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  
+ -