response time – Admin interface – use of “Please be patient”

In a recent update to one of our Admin interfaces (1 user), we added the following warning at the top, to remind the user that once they press the button, it can take several minutes to complete, and to avoid reloading the page and re-submitting, etc. (which has happened recently before the message was added)

enter image description here

The user, however, told us that they don’t get the point of saying “Please be patient”, especially in a Business/Admin interface, and asked if it’s implying that the person operating is “Impatient”. The user also mentioned that this message isn’t “helpful”, and is an incriminating statement.

I believe I’ve seen “Please be patient” written in other Software applications, and I thought this was a standard message to display when a process can take long / unpredictable time.

Was the use of “Please be patient” a bad idea here?
How would you formulate the message above?

database design – Why would patient management systems not assert limits for certain biometric data?

I think many people with even a small experience in designing UI/UX to handle user data will be familiar with the perils of putting in input field/database limits for personal data, such as names. However, when it comes to storing biometric data, such as in medical/patient management software, I might’ve assumed that there was some validation on input given the intended use-case!

That seems as though it might not always be the case, having recently seen this tweet, in which someone was invited for their COVID-19 vaccine prematurely, apparently due to his GP surgery storing his height as 6.2cm, giving a BMI of 28,000.

Questions:

Is this just a flaw in their particular software? Is it possibly just the case that many of these systems were never intended for the mass selection of patient groups?

Or are there valid reasons that you might not want to introduce input ranges and sanity checks to biometric data?


Colour me only mildly concerned, given the AI-based future of medical decision making!

Suppose we are developing a system for keeping records of COVID patient. Only Develop a tree based model for describing your problem domain

I need some guidance from my seniors. Guide me about tree-based model (relevant to the question only) and also the problem domain of this scenario.
Note:
No coding required,
only tree-based model Diagram if possible.
Making me understand about the question will also help me.

dnd 5e – Can a monk with the Dwarven Fortitude feat attack twice and heal (using Patient Defense to Dodge as a bonus action) in the same turn?

You only have one bonus action on your turn

The additional attack from Martial Arts uses a bonus action (emphasis added):

When you use the Attack action with an unarmed strike or a monk weapon on your turn, you can make one unarmed strike as a bonus action.

Similarly, Patient Defense also uses a bonus action (emphasis added):

You can spend 1 ki point to take the Dodge action as a bonus action on your turn.

And you can only take one bonus action per turn:

You can take only one bonus action on your turn, so you must choose which bonus action to use when you have more than one available.

Dwarven Fortitude does work with Patient Defense

The requirement for the relevant part of the Dwarven Fortitude feat reads (XGtE, p. 47):

Whenever you take the Dodge action in combat, you can spend one Hit Die to heal yourself.

And since Patient Defense does have you take the Dodge action (just as a bonus action), this meets the requirement listed in the feat. You should note that you are spending your Hit Dice to do this healing, eating into the healing resources for your short rest (and have taken a half feat for the privilege), and that you’ve spent a ki point (though the benefits of the Dodge action is often worth it). This totals one attack and some borrowed healing on one turn (until you get Extra Attack at 5th level, but that’s built into the class).

dnd 5e – What features, items, or spells allow dodging as a bonus action other than Monk’s Patient Defense?

Almost nothing lets you take the Dodge action as a bonus action

There is, of course, the Monk’s Patient Defense feature:

You can spend 1 ki point to take the Dodge action as a bonus action on your turn.

And besides that there is only the haste spell, which doesn’t actually grant it as a bonus action, but you can Dodge using haste’s own additional action:

Choose a willing creature that you can see within range. Until the spell ends, the target’s speed is doubled, it gains a +2 bonus to AC, it has advantage on Dexterity saving throws, and it gains an additional action on each of its turns. That action can be used only to take the Attack (one weapon attack only), Dash, Disengage, Hide, or Use an Object action. (…)

A theoretical third option would be to use the shapechange spell to turn into a creature that can already Dodge as a bonus action, has an extra action similar to haste, or something else along those lines (assuming such a monster exists).


Note, this is a Community Wiki post, feel free to edit it to add in other methods

android – How patient are users regarding mobile app startup time?

I am making a media player app on Android and one of the big priorities is making the startup of the app quick so that the user can just start the app and click play. I want to know a good benchmark to aim for so that the user feels that it is fast, but is still within the realm of doable (given the number of calculations and networking requests I want to do on startup). I saw somewhere in the Android documentation that if it takes your app longer than 1/10th of a second to respond, it feels slow, and am wondering how that applies to startup (if people are a little more tolerant of waiting). The app pulls a significant amount of data from a website and (among other network requests) I am trying to figure out when fetching new data from the website to check for changes against the app’s local cache will reach the point of diminishing returns.

website – What the EMR Advantage patient portal lets patients see, and what it doesn’t let them see

I used to live in Ottawa. At the time, I visited an Appletree Medical Group doctor. The doctor then stored some information in my electronic medical record (“chart”).

This week, my dental-hygiene clinic asked me for some information from my chart.

Today, I logged into the Appletree patient portal, which is really just an instance of the Canadian Health Systems EMR Advantage patient portal. But I couldn’t find the information I was looking for.

Why not?

Error executing a macro in Exel with Visual Basic? I'm new to code creation, be patient

Sub Macro_que_posiciona_la_t_consecutiva_resolver ()

ActiveCell.Offset(0, 11).Range("A1").Select
Application.CutCopyMode = False
Application.CutCopyMode = False
Application.CutCopyMode = False
Application.CutCopyMode = False
Application.CutCopyMode = False
ActiveCell.Offset(0, 1).Range("A1").GoalSeek Goal:=Range("K100").End(xlUp).Select, ChangingCell:= _
    ActiveCell

End Sub

c – Number of cases of disease as a function of patient age (pointer variables?)

The user will give as a double entry with the first number being the number of disease cases of a specific age, I have to link "number of cases" with "age" and be able to edit this number of cases, it has the possibility of receiving more cases for an age already mentioned earlier. In addition to that, it will give the numbers X and Y, so I have to print the number of cases related to the ages between X and Y. Any clue? I know this is related to pointer variables, but I'm not sure exactly how to use it (if someone can show me sample codes with this type of variable, I'd be grateful). The language I use is C.

Software design / architecture of a patient simulator with multiple mathematical models

I work on a simulator that simulates patients, so that specific processes can be validated on "virtual" patients, before testing on real patients. The simulator is essentially a mathematical model which consists of several ordinary differential equations (ODE), which can be calculated using a numerical method. These mathematical models are calculated step by step, which means that you need the previously calculated values ​​to calculate new values. These steps can be small or larger, the smaller the step, the better the result but the longer it takes to calculate.

At first, development went well, but gradually the simulator became a mess, we introduced a second mathematical model and a second ODE solver. Who had to work with the same "virtual" patients. But the second mathematical model required the patient to have additional fields and the vector table of calculated values ​​became a little larger (from 7 entries per step to 10 entries). It worked, but we are now thinking of adding another mathematical model, which requires even more properties in a patient and the calculated values ​​could not be stored in the same vector table, since the first 3 entries are for different values of the other models. We are now considering leaving the first 3 entries 0 / null and adding 3 entries at the end of the vector array for the most recent model.

Here is our simplified class diagram to show the problem:
class diagram

The class diagram shows only 2 concrete models and 2 concrete solvers, but we must add at least 1 additional model. As you can see, the patient has 7 variables. The first model requires the first 5, the seconds all and the last model requires only the last 4 (and 2 additional not yet added). Below is a program with "life events" of the patient which have an influence on the calculated values ​​of the patient. Below is the vector table which has 10 entries. the first 7 are only used by the mathematical model X, the 10 are used by the Y model and the most recent model would require the addition of 3 more at the end, and the first 3 would not be used by this model .

What is a design model that would work here?

Heritage
I have tried to use inheritance. The second model uses the first model as the base class, it works. But when a third model is added that doesn't need certain values ​​/ functions, is this still a good way to go? The patient's problem still existed, because it also had to be inherited or additional attributes simply had to be added.

decorator pattern
Also tried, but had the same problems as inheritance.

Does anyone see a solution to this design problem?

Then there is a second problem
This problem concerns the creation of the simulator mentioned above. As you can see, creating patients is done via a CreatePatient () function in the simulator, which requires a list of patient values ​​(variables 1 to 7 in patient) which increases with the addition of models. And a calendar with "life events" that influence the values ​​calculated by the patient.

The creation of the simulator, the planning, the model and the solver is now done in a CLI and a GUI project which reference the Simlator project. There are 2 problems I see, the first concerns the growing list of attributes / properties and calculated values ​​vector array when adding a model. This makes it more difficult to create a patient. To resolve this issue, the first issue discussed above must first be resolved in my opinion. Second, the creation is a bit weird now. The CLI requests a file path from the user which points to an .ini file with the configuration of the simulator. This .ini file includes a configuration like the duration of the simulator, the size of the step size (remember the models mentioned above and how they are solved), if the patients have to be exported, the seeds. It also gives for each possible patient value (attribute / patient property) the range of that value, and you can also add a list of paths to .ini files that contain hard-coded patient values.
So you could say I want 50 patients and then give the point to 25 .ini files in the .ini configuration file for the simulator and the rest of the patients will be generated using the range specified by value. The same is done for the calendar which must be generated for each patient.

The problem I see with the above is that a patient is created via the simulator object after it is created, but the patient's calendar is not. The reason that scheduling is not is that it is now generated in the CLI / GUI interface based on certain parameters of the .ini file. Should these creations be done differently? does the creation of a patient even have to be done via a simulator object? Should there be a factory method for each object (calendar, patient)?

Summary | Explanation of high leverage
I am currently trying to refactor a project so that it is more extensible. The basis of the project consists of a "patient" model with a set of attributes and an array of vectors. The attributes will be filled during creation, but are too tightly coupled to the classes that require these attributes. For example: class 1 only needs the 1-5 attribute and class 2 only needs 4-10.

I'm looking for a solution that makes it easier to add class3, class4 and class5 but doesn't inflate the patient class with even more attributes.

One solution I have tried is to have different patient classes per class1, class2, etc. This works to some extent, as the patient class must be used in other places that would require the if / switch statement to find out what attributes they can get from the patient for example. 1 to 5 or 4 to 10.

Possible solution 1
To work with the ever-changing amount of patient attributes, I will now build a parameter structure. When creating the simulator object, I will check which mathematical model is used and based on that, I will create a structure containing the patient values ​​required by this specific model. The structure will inherit from IPatientParameter which can then be used to store it in the patient object.