Data Integrity Check under review: Difference between revisions

From CCMDB Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
← Older editNewer edit →
mNo edit summary
mNo edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
== Cross checks that need review ==
== Cross checks that need review ==
Current number of Data Integrity Checks: {{#ask: [[DICStatus::needs review]] |format=count }}
Current number of Data Integrity Checks: {{#ask: [[DICStatus::needs review]] |format=count }}
{{#ask: [[DICStatus::needs review]]
 
|?DICSummary=check summary
{{#cargo_query:
|?DiscussQuestion=question
tables=DataIntegrityChecks,Discussions,_pageData
|?DICApp=app
|join on=DataIntegrityChecks._pageName=_pageData._pageName,DataIntegrityChecks._pageName=Discussions._pageName
|limit=1000
|fields=
|format=broadtable
CONCAT("\[\{\{fullurl:",DataIntegrityChecks._pageName, "{{!}}action=edit\}\} edit]")=edit,
|link=all
DataIntegrityChecks._pageName=page, App, Status, Timing, Firmness, Summary, question, who
|class=sortable wikitable smwtable
|where=DataIntegrityChecks.Status = "needs review"
}} <!-- |?Last editor is -->
|order by=question  
|limit=100
|offset=some number
|default=Nothing found
|format=dynamic table
|rows per page=1000
}}


[[Category:Data Integrity Checks | *]]
[[Category:Data Integrity Checks | *]]

Revision as of 12:46, 15 September 2021

Cross checks that need review

Current number of Data Integrity Checks: 8

edit page App Status Timing Firmness Summary question who
edit page App Status Timing Firmness Summary question who
edit Function long LOS() CCMDB.accdb needs review complete soft check LOS/Length of Stay should not be unlikely long based on historical LOS for a given ward (Service/Location field).
edit Query check CCI each count vs LOS CCMDB.accdb needs review complete soft check Confirm that a Category:Labs Imaging count is not unreasonably high
edit Query check long transfer delay CCMDB.accdb needs review always soft check Is the Transfer Delay (Critical Care) or Transfer Delay (Medicine) unreasonably long?
edit Query Import request matcher DSM Labs Consistency check.accdb needs review always not entered Records in for which we have patients in L_Log but no lab records from DSM
edit Query s tmp MR CCMDB.accdb needs review complete hard check Checks for Project MR
edit Query check tmp AHC CCMDB.accdb needs review complete hard check For patients with Previous Location ER at same site there should be a Boarding Loc ER.
  • if there is referral sent there must be a referral received entry and a consult dealt with entryLisa Kaita 11:31, 7 August 2025 (CDT)
    • pt could die in between? consult could go missing? In a way those would be really the ones we would want to know about, no? I suppose we could make it a soft check... Ttenbergen 16:26, 19 August 2025 (CDT)
    • this almost sounds like the opposite of how I would have understood the current instructions. I would have thought those to mean to only enter "consult received" if there was no good data for consult sent. How do we actually want to use this?
 Lisa
edit Query check tmp AHC CCMDB.accdb needs review complete hard check For patients with Previous Location ER at same site there should be a Boarding Loc ER.
  • item must not be "not entered"
  • I implemented this one and 40 records in my test data have a "not entered" in complete data. Did I misunderstand the instructions?
    		•  Lisa
    edit Query Check VADT too close to first boarding loc CCMDB.accdb needs review always soft check no idea hope JM or LK remember

    We discussed this in our after-Task meeting 2023-07-23 and I just stumbled across it. I do not remember what this was about, nor what a reasonable delay would be. Could one of you fill in the details for the query if we still want it? No hurry. In fact I'd prefer if you not hurried ;-). Ttenbergen 21:38, 13 August 2025 (CDT)

    • SMW


    • Cargo


    • Categories
    		 Lisa
    edit Query check tmp Overstay2 CCMDB.accdb needs review complete hard check Not yet filled in others? Julie
    edit Query Check VADT too close to first boarding loc CCMDB.accdb needs review always soft check no idea hope JM or LK remember We discussed this in our after-Task meeting 2023-07-23 and I just stumbled across it. I do not remember what this was about, nor what a reasonable delay would be. Could one of you fill in the details for the query if we still want it? No hurry. In fact I'd prefer if you not hurried ;-). Ttenbergen 21:38, 13 August 2025 (CDT) Julie
    Retrieved from "https://ccmdb.kuality.ca/index.php?title=Data_Integrity_Check_under_review&oldid=152001"