Demo Version for Demonstration improved

OpenEMR Development
1

blankev wrote on Wednesday, August 19, 2009:

"How we could improve on the demonstration of the Demo versions."

In the past we had problems to login with a different language and nobody who did not make/use their own OpenEMR version was able to SEE what OpenEMR could do in a different Language. From Demo version 3.1.0 this is different … 

With the latest improvements at login-screen (and without any problem) we have the choice of language!

Thinking of this improvement, we can use this improvement and make a better show and improve on what OpenEMR has to offer. Many more choices of with/without before or just after login could improve the show of what OpenEMR is worth.

So subjects like how to use/import ICD9 or ICD10 codes with or without CPT4 values, could be in there from the start and could handle many self explaining questions. Same for DEA print on recipe, what is the difference between CAMOS and other parts of OpenEMR. With CAMOS It is possible to use it in OpenEMR but does not seem to make things easier to understand OpenEMR and this might be the reason it is not implemented as default.

Also, we should make the Demo versions more filled with more choices (Why only California if is easy to add Florida, New York etc. Start the MySQL database with more filled tables and multiple choices as mentioned before able to use from the Login screen. If you want, you can make a start "with or without". Like this or that. Or with default… IPPF, Athletics, Drug selling, etc.

On the Demo site it would be great to start with some Mock Facilities, Users, Clients and some definite histories of mack patients, and these should be always automatic included when Demo is renewed. Even some input over time on different dates would help to get a really good impression of what OpenEMR is capable to do.

Some of it could be taken from the Demo version 3.0.1since within 3.0.1 there is no administration part and seems to be filled with lot of old historic data.

Yes Rod, Yes Brady, Yes Tony, Ok Sam you as practitioner might have known the same for some time, I know this might give rise to new programming headaches and other complaints, but once the possibilities are shown in the Demo versions, one can SEE what could be done and see if something is worthwhile the effort to further explore.

And selling the product for developers is just a "have a look and be convinced" thing.

Some clean-up is in order like:
In immunizations and Exams/Tests for in Medicine there should not be a double place do the same immunizations.

Translations have other problems to be met: (Dutch translation) From this date “to” that date and this letter is send from me “to” you, “TO” can’t be translated in Dutch with one word and should have the possibility to be translated since it loks stupid to se the wrong word on the wrong place. One of the two “TO”'s has to be changed in a different word in English to solve this problem.

These suggestions could, but don’t have to be implemented in the next Major release but could give the Demo versions a more serious impression for the prospect USERS.

Pimm

2

jesran wrote on Wednesday, August 19, 2009:

WeFor the single user demo version of GE Centricity it was told to us by the vendor folks that the mock patient data originates from one of the original developers who was a provider and he/she used their own patient data, de-identified, of course. I believe it, because the make believe folks are pretty robust subjects with realistic complexity.

I’m not suggesting that somebody volunteer their OpenEMR data, but have we ever entertained this notion? Of course, this would necessitate de-identifying the provider also to absolutely minimize the chance of anyone figuring out who any patient is. 

3

bradymiller wrote on Wednesday, August 19, 2009:

hey,

There are more usable demos of production versions here (there are links to this in the oemr.org wiki demo section):
http://bradymd.com/appliance/demos.html

When I make these for 3.1.0 (usually follows about one month after a release), I could put more data in them.

The real point of the cvs demos is mostly for testing (although good for users to see all new stuff under developement), so these just look like what openemr looks like right out of the box. This has been a great tool for identifying and fixing bugs.

-brady

4

blankev wrote on Thursday, August 20, 2009:

My truly impression is that "IF" you want to test the whole package you must have some historical data and multi fascility and multi users. After each new start each day Development Demo versions loose their new input and are empty as before and it is a struggle to do every day a new input of all test data.

5

bradymiller wrote on Thursday, August 20, 2009:

Pimm,

  You just described one of the beauties of the cvs demos. Every time you enter in that basic information, you are testing openemr for low-level bugs. These low-level bugs are the ones that will turn users away. I’d argue that since these demos have been introduced, the out of box behavior of openemr has been drastically improved.

Again, we have full production demos for users (link above). Perhaps I should provide links to these from the cvs demo pages to make more clear?

-brady

6

blankev wrote on Thursday, August 20, 2009:

There are demo versions of the most updated official releases. Yes you can test low level. It is not that I disagree about usage, it are the demos that show how new releases will do the job wherever possible. Old releases are to demonstrate what is possible, but I haven’t seen any demonstration of Athletic facility, IPPF clinic, OpenEMR with Drug and other selling possibilities, etc. To make these choices from a startup screen would be another boost for OpenEMR if implemented in the released versions old and new versions.

Let me give you another example: to test language, you have to go to your own language, but to explain what is wrong or what is wanted, you have to go back to the original language and explain what and how to translate. Since you made "your login-screen" with different language options this was reduced to a fraction of time involved.

But as already stated, it takes more than just my logic to convince…

If you make referrals to the other Demo pages it would not solve testing of the latest CVS changes with real new/past input.

You have the list filled with California and USA why not improve and add Florida, Hawai and Canada, Mexico… you know many medical field workers do their work in those regions and those countries it would not do any harm, but would show the options for making choices in OpenEMR. Same for multi-facility and multi-User options…

OK YOU are the boss and me is the trouble guy ;…-(  , and this is NOT something to implement today, but was intended to be used somewhere in the future, these are observations from someone who tried to give some suggestions for improvement on testing OpenEMR.

7

bradymiller wrote on Thursday, August 20, 2009:

Pimm,

Any, including trouble guys like you :), user suggestions are always highly valued. Keep them coming,

-brady

8

jesran wrote on Thursday, August 20, 2009:

Brady,
I found 3 mock patients in the OpenEMR 3.0.1 Virtual Appliance Online Demo
http://bradymd.com/appliance/demos.html

Mr. Asdsa Asd Asd
Mr. John Q. Doe
Mr. Fred Barney Miller

This was a great help for testing, but a few more realistic patients would be exponentially more helpful. FYI I have no intention on using OpenEMR for patient care. I am looking to help out with testing and debugging from a clinical analyst perspective. The more realistic patients in there the better as far as I am concerned.
-Jerry

9

bradymiller wrote on Friday, August 21, 2009:

Jerry,
I’ll add more realistic patients to the next production demo (probably come out in about a month or so).
thanks,
brady