Populate linking pairs: Difference between revisions
Ttenbergen (talk | contribs) |
Ttenbergen (talk | contribs) m (→Implementation) |
||
Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
Because MS Access doesn't have functionality to compare data in a "current" to a "next" record this is implemented as an iterative process in Module ''linking'' Sub ''populate_linking_pairs'' which populates the [[linking_pairs table]]. | Because MS Access doesn't have functionality to compare data in a "current" to a "next" record this is implemented as an iterative process in Module ''linking'' Sub ''populate_linking_pairs'' which populates the [[linking_pairs table]]. | ||
The process considers the output of | The process considers the output of [[Query linking_pairs_preList]]. | ||
For any line that has the same PHIN as the previous line it generates a record in [[linking_pairs table]] of the two D_IDs. | For any line that has the same PHIN as the previous line it generates a record in [[linking_pairs table]] of the two D_IDs. |
Revision as of 10:24, 2021 July 28
As part of vetting CFE needs to pair up any records for the consecutive/continuous admission of a patient.
Instructions
- be sure you have completed Pre-linking checks
- click the "populate linking_pairs" button on the main screen
- 2019-Feb-07: NOTE: takes ~08 minutes to run
- After this is done, move on to Correcting suspect links
Implementation
Because MS Access doesn't have functionality to compare data in a "current" to a "next" record this is implemented as an iterative process in Module linking Sub populate_linking_pairs which populates the linking_pairs table.
The process considers the output of Query linking_pairs_preList.
For any line that has the same PHIN as the previous line it generates a record in linking_pairs table of the two D_IDs.
2021-07 review
The iterating is the slow part, so how can we reduce it; eg by shifting some of the work into queries
Scenarios
Two things will make a record require a pairs update:
- a new record is added (the >95% case)
- an older record(s) is changed, requiring a re-alignment (the <2% case)
- a collector catches up with backlog, and 2 records that had already been linked 1-3 need to be re-linked to 1-2-3 (the 3% case)
Algorithm
Clean our only those pairs that are questionable:
- find all records whose pairs have non-consecutive (admit dttms)
- need to admit this with the old style admit dttm included so the wholesale recreation will still work
- remove all pairs related to those patients (ie have same PHIN)(easier than figuring out which to remove)
- remove all pairs where a pair-less profile is present for the same phin
- this would include old single encounters (57% of our records are single encounters)
Run the populate linking code, but run it only for profiles that aren't in pairs
- run the linking pairs updater only for profiles that don't have