Design Intent - IA Feedback - MHV to VA.gov Team - Medical Records (Lab & Test)

VFS acceptance criteria

Thinking about the tremendous impact this will have on people's lives is very exciting! I think two things will help a lot with this project: (1) a master metadata schema, and (2) a data model (what order/ placement those fields will get in the UI). More details below:

Metadata Schema

There was great alignment on this during the meeting, but just to document it: there are some data discrepancies across the test types right now. A master metadata schema will build consistent language across this entire product.
- As you map fields & decide on labels, think about plain language & users' mental models. What are those things labeled in other medical health/care systems that our users may be familiar with?

Data Model

Where should each field from your schema live in the UI? In what priority order?
- I loved your use of H2 subheadings to divide up the page into sections, and think this will be really helpful going forward.
Current H1: right now the data hierarchy has the Lab Type as the H1 (e.g. Chemistry and Hematology). This is not what I would expect a test result would be named. Flipping the data model to put a priority on the type of test (e.g. Glucose, Iron, Complete blood count) will require some work (& may introduce conditionals if some results don't have the right metadata). But overall, would be clearer for the end-user. I'd nudge you to explore that.

Scannability

Lab results (like those under "chemistry and hematology") are hard to scan. A visual could do a lot of lift here (example below). See also Design ticket for their POV.

Images

You mentioned needing more time to work through this, but I wanted to prompt you early to consider how an external link to images will affect the flow/navigation
- When/if users have to leave the page to use another tool, how will they get back?
- Will users want or expect the capability to print/download images?

Other

I assume patients may see their own lab results before a physician gets to it. Can we add some content/notification to inform users that their care provider will follow up with them via secure messaging to interpret results? (I am making an assumption here about the process...correct me if wrong). cc @kristinoletmuskat

Practice areas will document their feedback following the Must, Should, and Consider Framework.

Must:

Should:

Consider:

Remove the governance-team label
Update "Issue Title"
Link to collab cycle Request epic
Add your feedback
Remove the CC-Request label (only if you created the ticket using the New Issue link from the Collaboration Cycle Reviews board)
Add assignees based on collab cycle touchpoint
- Design Intent: VFS designer, VFS PM (optional), yourself (optional)
- Midpoint Review: VFS PM, yourself (optional)
- Staging Review QA Only: VFS PM, yourself (optional)

Metadata schema:
- Laura has put together this documentation for data fields.
Data Model/Where should each field from your schema live in the UI? In what priority order?
- When possible, we are trying to list information in the order that is most useful to the patient, then grouping fields by relevancy. We will be keeping an eye on this during usability testing.
Data Model/Current H1:
- We have done this where we could, though if there is no test name available, the H1 will still only reflect the lab type.
Scannability/Lab results are hard to scan. Later phases will incorporate visuals. The MVP in phase 0 focuses on providing data.
Images:
- Our goal is to allow the user to view all images on the page rather than leaving to use another tool. When downloading specialty images, we will provide instructional content. We will be touching on the usefulness during usability testing.
Other/I assume patients may see their own lab results before a physician gets to it:
- There will be content explaining that certain labs and tests will take time to appear in their record because their doctor has 36 hours to review it before the patient sees it.