able to assign an unregistered patient to doctor

[xmtan1]

'claire' is not a registered patient at the hospital, but actually registered as a doctor.. I don't think it makes sense to assign a doctor a patient that doesn't exist?

[nus-se-script]

[IMPORTANT!: Please do not edit or reply to this comment using the GitHub UI. You can respond to it using CATcher during the next phase of the PE]

Team's Response

This was a cool functionality that allowed the making of a new patient without updating the patient so that we would not have to first make a new patient called CLAIRE in the list later.

This was done for more freedom of work and quick work when needing to assign a patient to a doctor first in the case of emergencies then, we can slowly assess their issues and list them out in the patient list when registering them officially. This was kept so as to make it easy to keep track of patients and register them in the time of emergencies.

Items for the Tester to Verify

❓ Issue response

Team chose [response.Rejected]

• I disagree

Reason for disagreement: I understand the intention of being able to make a new patient when assigning the doctor to them, but I do not understand how it 'makes it easy to keep track of patients' as you mentioned in the last line.

Now you have two types of patients: one that was created and registered from the start, and one that was create during an 'emergency'. I checked your feature functionality again, but the spontaneously created patient is not added into the list.

For this functionality to be fully useful, I think there should either be a) another list to store the patients that were created spontaneously or b) a feature to add them to the current list without details first, then go back and update their details once you get them. Otherwise, the user would have to keep checking the history of the app to see if there were any new patients created and register them fully, which can create mistakes like them missing a patient, or inputing the wrong name.

I noticed that there is also no feature to view the doctor's past patients. If someone were to assign the doctor to a new patient before the newly created one is added to the list, the patient data would be lost, wouldn't that cause more trouble?

I believe the intention is good, but there are just too many ways that this feature would cause trouble currently. Therefore, I disagree with the rejection of this bug.

---

❓ Issue type

Team chose [type.DocumentationBug]
Originally [type.FunctionalityBug]

• I disagree

Reason for disagreement: I originally thought that this feature was a loophole that the dev team missed, and thus worked unexpectedly. However, knowing that it was intentional, I believe it should be classified as a Feature bug instead. I feel this feature is less useful than it can be, because of the lack of storage of these new patients that can have many problems arise.

There is no mention of this feature in the UG, nor is there any error message when I try to use it, otherwise I would classify it as NotInScope.

---

❓ Issue severity

Team chose [severity.Low]
Originally [severity.Medium]

• I disagree

Reason for disagreement: Since it is an intended function, I would not classify it as low severity as I do not think it 'appears only in very rare situations'. If the user does not handle this functionality properly, it can cause major inconvenience, especially since it is supposed to be for use in a hospital, where storing patient data is crucial.

---