Feedback from Android beta testing

September 05, 2011 09:32

Simon Site Administrator
Sheffield Teaching Hospitals 578 posts

marke said:
Geofftrez said:

I note that autocalc still doesnt function correctly. If you are concerned at litigation why not make it function in a sensible manner but set it so that you have to overtype it or else it defaults as a null value when you save.

Geoff can you elaborate on your comment regarding 'litigation' ? what do you mean by this.

Litigation = getting sued. I'm not normally one for saying no to new feature requests as I want the app/site to be the best they can be. That said, in this age of 'no win no fee' PI claims, and the fact that we are a very small group of people working on this without profit in our spare time, I don't want to set us up as a target of a lawsuit. Having said that, if we could come up with a solution which implemented this function, and protected us from getting sued, I'd get working on it straight away.

So if anyone has ideas on how to protect us and add this feature then let me know Smile

September 05, 2011 10:41

Geofftrez DAFNE Graduate
Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust 22 posts

Suggestions for Simon:
1. add data fields in the targets section (for each mealtime/incident) for ratio CP:BG default 1:2.5 QA:BG default 1:2.5. I would have thought that these field together with the QA:CP ratio should cover most of the user population.
2. Ensure that the autocalc result has to be overtyped and defaults to a null value otherwise.
3. Incorporate a standard disclaimer for the autocalc function which is triggered if the autocal setting is chosen with a tick box for the user to acknowledge "autocalc is a suggestion only based on the data values you have inserted in the targets section and is not a medical recommendation. The autocalc may not function correctly for every user and is intended simply as an approximate check sum to compare against your own calculated insulin dose. If you chose to rely on this autocalc function then you do so against our recommendation and at your own risk etc etc"

September 05, 2011 20:01

marke Site Administrator
South East Kent PCT 675 posts

I agree with Geoff, although I do understand the concept of litigation Wink I hadn't realised that Simon had mentioned it himself. I believe the answer is to add a big disclaimer to the app, making it clear that it does NOT provide medical advice and is used at the users risk. We are not medic's and the app cannot and should not make
claims or give the impression that it does provide medical information.

September 05, 2011 22:01

Geofftrez DAFNE Graduate
Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust 22 posts

On reflection I'm unsure that my first suggestion is correct. The QA:BG ratio is used for corrections. The CP:QA ratio is a measure of insulin resistance. I don't think CP:BG is actually needed.

September 08, 2011 22:19

Simon Site Administrator
Sheffield Teaching Hospitals 578 posts

I like the idea Geoff, and think it's the right way to go. I thought taking 1 CP was meant to raise your BG by 2-3, so your CP:BG ratio is needed?

September 09, 2011 08:19

Geofftrez DAFNE Graduate
Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust 22 posts

Simon said:
I like the idea Geoff, and think it's the right way to go. I thought taking 1 CP was meant to raise your BG by 2-3, so your CP:BG ratio is needed?

Yes but you also have the QA:CP ratio which is used in the DAFNE calculations. CP:BG would I believe only be useful if you wanted to calculate a small corrective carbohydrate dose because you were close to having a hypo and you were not at a mealtime. We would normally have 1CP and do any correction at the next meatime. On this basis the CP:BG ratio isn't really needed. So sayiing as a DAFNE graduate I am a bit of a novice so hope someone will correct me if necessary.

If you were actually having a hypo there would be no correction at the next meal.

September 09, 2011 09:48

novorapidboi26 DAFNE Graduate
NHS Lanarkshire 1,819 posts

Hey, can I be emailed again with the link for the latest release............

Cheers.......... Wink

September 09, 2011 23:19

Simon Site Administrator
Sheffield Teaching Hospitals 578 posts

Geoff: thinking about it you're right, there is a standard 1.5 CP suggested for a hypo which we probably dont need to adjust manually, so its just the BG:QA ratio which is needed.

Novorapidboi: check your inbox!

September 10, 2011 14:12

John Syer DAFNE Graduate
Diabetes Australia-Vic, Melbourne, Victoria 19 posts

Simon said:
Geoff: thinking about it you're right, there is a standard 1.5 CP suggested for a hypo which we probably dont need to adjust manually, so its just the BG:QA ratio which is needed.

I may be missing something, but isn't it QA:CP ratio. Why do you need the BG:QA ratio? My personal experience is that BG:QA is unpredictable, depending on too many factors to make it a useful metric, (weather, temperature. stress levels, exercise, tiredness). I also find that BG:QA relationship changes depending on the value of BG, so it is non-linear.

Regards, John

September 13, 2011 08:53

KeithCl DAFNE Graduate
St Columcille's, Dublin 43 posts

Geofftrez said:

The keyboard layout when you call for the BG data field is perfect - simply a numeric keypad. The keyboard layout when you call for CP, QA and BI data fields is a typical phone alpha numeric keyboard. Since those fields only need numeric data I would suspect its a programming error.

Those fields also need to support the + and - characters so that adjustments can be entered. So while for the BG field I can use android:inputType="numberDecimal" which yields the neat numeric keypad, for the CP, QA and BI fields I have to use android:inputType="numberDecimal|numberSigned|text" to ensure that the + and - characters can be entered which typically yields the messy phone-style keyboard layout.

September 05, 2011 09:32 Simon Site Administrator Sheffield Teaching Hospitals 578 posts	marke said: Geofftrez said: I note that autocalc still doesnt function correctly. If you are concerned at litigation why not make it function in a sensible manner but set it so that you have to overtype it or else it defaults as a null value when you save. Geoff can you elaborate on your comment regarding 'litigation' ? what do you mean by this. Litigation = getting sued. I'm not normally one for saying no to new feature requests as I want the app/site to be the best they can be. That said, in this age of 'no win no fee' PI claims, and the fact that we are a very small group of people working on this without profit in our spare time, I don't want to set us up as a target of a lawsuit. Having said that, if we could come up with a solution which implemented this function, and protected us from getting sued, I'd get working on it straight away. So if anyone has ideas on how to protect us and add this feature then let me know
September 05, 2011 10:41 Geofftrez DAFNE Graduate Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust 22 posts	Suggestions for Simon: 1. add data fields in the targets section (for each mealtime/incident) for ratio CP:BG default 1:2.5 QA:BG default 1:2.5. I would have thought that these field together with the QA:CP ratio should cover most of the user population. 2. Ensure that the autocalc result has to be overtyped and defaults to a null value otherwise. 3. Incorporate a standard disclaimer for the autocalc function which is triggered if the autocal setting is chosen with a tick box for the user to acknowledge "autocalc is a suggestion only based on the data values you have inserted in the targets section and is not a medical recommendation. The autocalc may not function correctly for every user and is intended simply as an approximate check sum to compare against your own calculated insulin dose. If you chose to rely on this autocalc function then you do so against our recommendation and at your own risk etc etc"
September 05, 2011 20:01 marke Site Administrator South East Kent PCT 675 posts	I agree with Geoff, although I do understand the concept of litigation I hadn't realised that Simon had mentioned it himself. I believe the answer is to add a big disclaimer to the app, making it clear that it does NOT provide medical advice and is used at the users risk. We are not medic's and the app cannot and should not make claims or give the impression that it does provide medical information.
September 05, 2011 22:01 Geofftrez DAFNE Graduate Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust 22 posts	On reflection I'm unsure that my first suggestion is correct. The QA:BG ratio is used for corrections. The CP:QA ratio is a measure of insulin resistance. I don't think CP:BG is actually needed.
September 08, 2011 22:19 Simon Site Administrator Sheffield Teaching Hospitals 578 posts	I like the idea Geoff, and think it's the right way to go. I thought taking 1 CP was meant to raise your BG by 2-3, so your CP:BG ratio is needed?
September 09, 2011 08:19 Geofftrez DAFNE Graduate Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust 22 posts	Simon said: I like the idea Geoff, and think it's the right way to go. I thought taking 1 CP was meant to raise your BG by 2-3, so your CP:BG ratio is needed? Yes but you also have the QA:CP ratio which is used in the DAFNE calculations. CP:BG would I believe only be useful if you wanted to calculate a small corrective carbohydrate dose because you were close to having a hypo and you were not at a mealtime. We would normally have 1CP and do any correction at the next meatime. On this basis the CP:BG ratio isn't really needed. So sayiing as a DAFNE graduate I am a bit of a novice so hope someone will correct me if necessary. If you were actually having a hypo there would be no correction at the next meal.
September 09, 2011 09:48 novorapidboi26 DAFNE Graduate NHS Lanarkshire 1,819 posts	Hey, can I be emailed again with the link for the latest release............ Cheers..........
September 09, 2011 23:19 Simon Site Administrator Sheffield Teaching Hospitals 578 posts	Geoff: thinking about it you're right, there is a standard 1.5 CP suggested for a hypo which we probably dont need to adjust manually, so its just the BG:QA ratio which is needed. Novorapidboi: check your inbox!
September 10, 2011 14:12 John Syer DAFNE Graduate Diabetes Australia-Vic, Melbourne, Victoria 19 posts	Simon said: Geoff: thinking about it you're right, there is a standard 1.5 CP suggested for a hypo which we probably dont need to adjust manually, so its just the BG:QA ratio which is needed. I may be missing something, but isn't it QA:CP ratio. Why do you need the BG:QA ratio? My personal experience is that BG:QA is unpredictable, depending on too many factors to make it a useful metric, (weather, temperature. stress levels, exercise, tiredness). I also find that BG:QA relationship changes depending on the value of BG, so it is non-linear. Regards, John
September 13, 2011 08:53 KeithCl DAFNE Graduate St Columcille's, Dublin 43 posts	Geofftrez said: The keyboard layout when you call for the BG data field is perfect - simply a numeric keypad. The keyboard layout when you call for CP, QA and BI data fields is a typical phone alpha numeric keyboard. Since those fields only need numeric data I would suspect its a programming error. Those fields also need to support the + and - characters so that adjustments can be entered. So while for the BG field I can use android:inputType="numberDecimal" which yields the neat numeric keypad, for the CP, QA and BI fields I have to use android:inputType="numberDecimal\|numberSigned\|text" to ensure that the + and - characters can be entered which typically yields the messy phone-style keyboard layout.