search

ICPI / DAQ

Data Access and Quality sub-committee repository
0 stars 1 forks source link

Feedback wanted: MSD structure for TB & cervical cancer results #47

Closed kschlenker closed 5 years ago

kschlenker commented 6 years ago

We're soliciting feedback to give to the systems team about how results status for TB & cervical cancer should be handled in MSDs. Currently two formats are being debated and we want you to weigh in!

Option 1: Have a single OtherStatus column that contains both TB results and cervical cancer results

Indicator Disaggregate categoryOptionComboName HIV Status OtherStatus
HTS_TST Modality/Age/Sex/Result 10-14, Female, Positive Positive  
TX_TB TBScreen/NewExistingART/HIVStatus Life-long ART, New, TB Screen - Negative, Positive Positive Negative
CXCA_SCREEN Age/Sex/HIVStatus/ScreenResult/ScreenVisitType 15-19, Female, Positive, Cervical Cancer Screened - First Time, Cervical Cancer - Negative Positive Negative

Option 2: use two separate columns for TB results and for cervical cancer results

Indicator Disaggregate categoryOptionComboName HIV Status TB Status Cervical Cancer status
HTS_TST Modality/Age/Sex/Result 10-14, Female, Positive Positive    
TX_TB TBScreen/NewExistingART/HIVStatus Life-long ART, New, TB Screen - Negative, Positive Positive Negative  
CXCA_SCREEN Age/Sex/HIVStatus/ScreenResult/ScreenVisitType 15-19, Female, Positive, Cervical Cancer Screened - First Time, Cervical Cancer - Negative Positive   Negative

The biggest question in my mind is: does it seem at all feasible that one day we might have an indicator that looks at the cross-section of TB results & cervical caner results? If not, then a single column would suffice. If such an indicator did eventually get created then we'd need two separate columns

reference: https://github.com/pepfar-datim/Data-Warehouse/issues/2943

kschlenker commented 6 years ago

Feedback from DAQ meeting: Option 2 generally sounds fine with people (this seems to be what systems team was leaning towards already). DAQ strongly suggests renaming column headers with a consistent naming convention to make it user friendly:

abeagedew commented 5 years ago

To be implemented for FY19Q1.