Jason,
Abyot…
Can you explain me this further? Because if I got you correct - you are
saying you couldn’t do aggregation by dimesnsions which are not included in
the category combos.
I think it is clear that I can create data elements for the data entry
sheet I sent the exisitng cateogry combo functionality. This seems
straight forward, except we are using 1.4 here as the data collection
tool, and 2 analysis and presentation purposes. That is another
complication, but anyway, lets assume it is possible, and it certainly
seems to be the case.
Then for me… you are trying to do something else
which is not envisioned during data collection. If a dimesion can not be
constructed from the category combos (and corresponding options) then this
dimesion shouldn’t be asked during analysis.
I must completely disagree with you. As I stated previously, a DHIO
asked me two weeks ago, "How do I calculate the total incidence of
vector borne diseases?" Well, I said, You can create an indicator for
this, and add every vector borne disease to it and divide it my the
population. Seems reasonable. A bit of work, but it seems possible.
However, it gets stickier when you think about beginning to slice and
dice the data. Would an indicator need to be created for every
possible combination of diseases, age groups that we could possibly
dream up? If so, then we can completely do away with the PivotTables,
as we can just define an indicator for every possible combination that
we can dream up! This does not seem practical.
Another solution, as Johan just points out, is that we can use
different data element groups for this purpose. This seems possible as
well I guess. DHIS 1.4 and 2 will allow you to do this, but it does
result in a data integrity violation as entries in the resulting
PivotTables will be duplicated. Sure we can lump them together, but
which table tells me that two data element groups should be lumped
together? The problem is the lack of data element group sets (like
organizational unit group sets). If there was, then I think everything
would be fine (at least I think).
I am only convinced of one thing from this whole discussion - that we need
to extend the API so that we can do aggregation of different combinations
for the available (collected) atomic dimesion elements. As far as the MD
model … I can take your comments for renaming some of the objects - but
I don’t see a limitation in the model. But again everything is open here -
and anyone can take it further. I am just sharing my views as I was the
central person in the MD issue.
Well, my problem is that in my case, the data elements have not been
created as multidimensional from the beginning, thus the need to group
them into dimensions afterwards. I agree, as the categories have been
implemented now, it seems totally possible to create a data entry form
for the Excel sheet I have sent you. No problems there, it is just in
the analaysis that we are missing something.
In reply to Johan,
Vector-borne diseases can be a DE group.
But why can’t it be a category as well? This is a matter that is still
not clear. Where should the categories start and data element group
sets take over? Anyway, this is more of an academic question, and not
entirely relevant. it would seem that creating categories-category
combos should be used for data entry, and that data element group sets
should be used for anaysis.
If data elements have a category
inpatient/outpatient, you can easily get only outpatient data from the
pivot table (or, as many other countries: have two headcount elements for
each form: Total inpatients, Total outpatients). Communicable and
non-communicable diseases can also be an DE group, and if you don’t want
DEs to belong to two groups, you can lump them together with a query or in
he pivot table.
How can I lump them together in a PivotTable if I cannot determine
that they are in a group set together? I can hardwire it in the query
with regular expressions to pull out all instances of OPD, IP and
Deaths in data elements. I can create a supporting table and populate
them with data elements, but how will it be maintained and accessible
through the UI? I have done both of these things, but I do not think
it is part of the current functionality.
Anyway, to summarize this, as it seems we may be nearing some consensus.
- Current functionality for category-category combos is sufficient
for the purposes of multidimensional data entry, and provides enough
functionality for analysis of data based on the dimensions defined
during the data element creation.
What it seems is missing is the ability to isolate a category in, for example, a report table. So if there is an Age-Sex categorycombo on Malaria, you cannot isolate Malaria by Sex without also bringing Age. This may not be a problem. If it is we can probably solve it through API
- Current functionality for grouping of data elements by dimensions
for analysis is insufficient and needs to be extended to include the
concept of data element group sets.
Funny. We seem to have the opposite problem here with the above. If I understand you right you are saying effectively we cannot create multiple dimensions by composition because data elements can only be members of one group.
And presumably this also applies to indicators.
Yes. That is why I so eagerly pushed data element/indicator group sets yesterday. We need it for exactly this purpose.
···
2009/10/1 Bob Jolliffe bobjolliffe@gmail.com
2009/10/1 Jason Pickering jason.p.pickering@gmail.com
Regards
Bob
Capiche?
Regards,
Jason
Best regards,
Jason
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dhis2-devs
Post to : dhis2-devs@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dhis2-devs
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp