LAU LTC consult: Difference between revisions

(4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)

Line 14:

* The first dttm of consult to LTC

~~{{DT| for this field the default entry for yes is the~~ LTC ~~Medical application, however I later realized that this is not a~~ consult ~~per se, as some have this completed without an actual~~ consult ~~to LTC (the learning process for this project~~ was ~~confusing, I~~ should have ~~spoken~~ to ~~someone from LTC before starting this) I continued to enter it this way, but also answered "yes" for those that had an actual LTC consult where~~ the dttm were either earlier than the medical application or they did not have a medical application but had a LTC consult, I noted details in the Q column and the notes. I know this is an analysis nightmare but I think I can clean this up if before Julie does her analysis I go through these records [[User:~~Lkaita|Lisa Kaita]] 07:44, 11 April 2025 (CDT) }}~~

=== Data Description ===

For every [[LAU LTC consult]] one line with Project = "LTC consult" and item = "not entered" was automatically be entered. That line should have been updated to one of the following:

~~=== Data Entry Instructions ===~~

* '''Project: LTC Consult'''

** Item: "LTC first"

~~For every [[LAU LTC consult]] one line with Project = "LTC consult" and item = "not entered" will automatically be entered. Update that line to one of the following:~~

** Item: "no consult"

* '''Project: LTC Consult''' - Item: "no"

* ~~'''Project: LTC Consult''' -~~ Item: "~~yes~~"

Data Quality Issues:

* No cross-checks were implemented so 5 "not entered" records ended up in the data.

* all 600 records should have had an entry, but only 581 do

* will report absent and "not entered" as "unclear"

==== Sources ====

Line 29:

Line 31:

* progress notes

== Data Use ==

This data is being collected as a current state for [[LAU Collection Project]].

This item is related to the "PCH Panel" item entry in [[Project Consults data]] and should be interpreted in conjunction with it.

== Data ~~Use~~ ==

=== LTC Medical Application vs Consult ===

~~This data~~ is ~~being collected~~ as a ~~current state for~~ [[~~LAU Collection Project~~]].

* "LTC first" was entered for either

** throughout the collection: LTC Medical Application was entered (but sometimes those are not actually sent...)

** for the later part of the project:

*** for those that had an actual LTC consult where one of the following was true:

***** the dttm were either earlier than the LTC Medical Application

***** no medical application but had a LTC consult

**** I noted details in the Q column and the notes.

== Data Analysis Consideration ==

* for this field the default entry for yes is the LTC Medical application, however I later realized that this is not a consult per se, as some have this completed without an actual consult to LTC (the learning process for this project was confusing, I should have spoken to someone from LTC before starting this) I continued to enter it this way, but also answered "yes" for those that had an actual LTC consult where the dttm were either earlier than the medical application or they did not have a medical application but had a LTC consult, I noted details in the Q column and the notes. I know this is an analysis nightmare but I think I can clean this up if before Julie does her analysis I go through these records [[User:Lkaita|Lisa Kaita]] 07:44, 11 April 2025 (CDT)

{{Data Integrity Check List|}}

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 * The first dttm of consult to LTC
-{{DT| for this field the default entry for yes is the LTC Medical application, however I later realized that this is not a consult per se, as some have this completed without an actual consult to LTC (the learning process for this project was confusing, I should have spoken to someone from LTC before starting this) I continued to enter it this way, but also answered "yes" for those that had an actual LTC consult where the dttm were either earlier than the medical application or they did not have a medical application but had a LTC consult, I noted details in the Q column and the notes.  I know this is an analysis nightmare but I think I can clean this up if before Julie does her analysis I go through these records [[User:Lkaita|Lisa Kaita]] 07:44, 11 April 2025 (CDT)  }}
+=== Data Description ===
+For every [[LAU LTC consult]]  one line with Project = "LTC consult" and item = "not entered" was automatically be entered. That line should have been updated to one of the following:
-=== Data Entry Instructions ===
+* '''Project: LTC Consult'''
+** Item: "LTC first"
-For every [[LAU LTC consult]]  one line with Project = "LTC consult" and item = "not entered" will automatically be entered. Update that line to one of the following:
+** Item: "no consult"
-* '''Project: LTC Consult''' - Item: "no"
-* '''Project: LTC Consult''' - Item: "yes"
+Data Quality Issues:
+* No cross-checks were implemented so 5 "not entered" records ended up in the data.
+* all 600 records should have had an entry, but only 581 do
+* will report absent and "not entered" as "unclear"
 ==== Sources ====
@@ Line 29: / Line 31: @@
 * progress notes
+== Data Use ==
+This data is being collected as a current state for [[LAU Collection Project]].
+This item is related to the "PCH Panel" item entry in [[Project Consults data]] and should be interpreted in conjunction with it.
-== Data Use ==
+=== LTC Medical Application vs Consult ===
-This data is being collected as a current state for [[LAU Collection Project]].
+* "LTC first" was entered for either
+** throughout the collection: LTC Medical Application was entered (but sometimes those are not actually sent...)
+** for the later part of the project:
+*** for those that had an actual LTC consult where one of the following was true:
+***** the dttm were either earlier than the LTC Medical Application
+***** no medical application but had a LTC consult
+**** I noted details in the Q column and the notes.
+== Data Analysis Consideration ==
+* for this field the default entry for yes is the LTC Medical application, however I later realized that this is not a consult per se, as some have this completed without an actual consult to LTC (the learning process for this project was confusing, I should have spoken to someone from LTC before starting this) I continued to enter it this way, but also answered "yes" for those that had an actual LTC consult where the dttm were either earlier than the medical application or they did not have a medical application but had a LTC consult, I noted details in the Q column and the notes.  I know this is an analysis nightmare but I think I can clean this up if before Julie does her analysis I go through these records [[User:Lkaita|Lisa Kaita]] 07:44, 11 April 2025 (CDT)
 {{Data Integrity Check List|}} <!-- this will populate automatically from the cross-checks -->