You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
When a track has multiple appointment fields (e.g. at age 5/8/12/21 months) the automatic appointment filter always fills the first available appointment field. But for patients starting later (e.g. transferral at age 7 months) the first appointment(s) should be skipped. By adding conditions (in this case for age between 4 and 6 months) this first field could be invalid and the next would be filled. The conditions editor that is currently used for rounds only should work fine for this purpose.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
You can already set minimum and maximum time difference. The problem is that each field is relative to the previous. A fix would be to be able to set the base value from which these minimum and maximum should be calculated. Either from the previous appointmentfield, the respondent start date or maybe a date trackfield (with birthday, treatment start date, etc.)
Would this be an appropriate fix in this use case?
This will work, but still one can't time appointments when e.g. previous appointments have been skipped. The interface is not clear in its descriptions and order. A new Out-of-the-box thinking proposal by users (maybe using a wizard-like approach) will be discussed in the next release meeting.
, also added Filter Check option at appointment level
The current extension do not change the workings of the fields, but do make it easier to see what happens where.
When a track has multiple appointment fields (e.g. at age 5/8/12/21 months) the automatic appointment filter always fills the first available appointment field. But for patients starting later (e.g. transferral at age 7 months) the first appointment(s) should be skipped. By adding conditions (in this case for age between 4 and 6 months) this first field could be invalid and the next would be filled. The conditions editor that is currently used for rounds only should work fine for this purpose.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: