Importing values from previous exams

[rprice]

Is there a way to import values from previous exams? I know F8 inputs default values and F9 brings up a list, but how do you fill in the same info from the last exam?

[erica]

Absolutely!
This will need to be done with a button command for specific fields.

While in edit mode, create a button and place it on your page.
See the screenshot for programing:

In field action, you will enter the field you want the previous value to go into.
Select the Set to Prev Value radio button - Checking off All Prev Vals from the same date is optional.
Scroll down to the bottom of the window to save the command. Add in additional fields as needed.
This is what the Button Settings will look like with a few commands added in:


That's pretty much it! If you need us to go over this with you let us know in tech support.
Thanks!
Erica

[drdanny]

To piggyback on this, we have our pre-CrystalPM records plugged into an "Exam Writer" tab. I would like to reach into the fields carrying IOP values and such for an IOP graph but don't know the fields to reference. Is there a way to dig into field definitions/designations in old records carrying currently-unused tabs or templates?

Thanks!

[erica]

Jul 15, 2015 12:24:39 GMT -6 drdanny said:

To piggyback on this, we have our pre-CrystalPM records plugged into an "Exam Writer" tab. I would like to reach into the fields carrying IOP values and such for an IOP graph but don't know the fields to reference. Is there a way to dig into field definitions/designations in old records carrying currently-unused tabs or templates?

Thanks!

I can take a look at it, send me an email [e-mail] and let me know your contact info as well as a generally good time to call.
Erica

[drdanny]

Will do! Thanks!

[drdanny]

Okay, so I figured some stuff out. Turns out those old Exam Writer fields I want have been repurposed into some general Medical History stuff in the template we chose. (Fields 1308 - 1315 or so.)

So. New question:
==Can I add anything to my "Fill the IOP Grid" button that specifies specific cells prior to a given exam date?

I want to write a button like so:

<Time>1024</Time><Instrument>1792 ... etc | CD | FILL IOP GRID
If Then : <date of exam> | is before | 6/19/2015
<Time>different numbers ... etc | CD | FILL IOP GRID

That way, I can get everybody snug and sound into the same chart. It'd be a piece-of-cake button to write if those commands were actually a thing. Crossing my fingers... Maybe if date could be read as a numerical value and then the middle column could still be "less than" as allowed in the drop-down.

While I'm at it, there doesn't happen to be a compendium of button-writing abbreviations and commands floating around anywhere, is there?

(Thanks for all the time spent kicking around the forum answering questions!)

[erica]

You may be able to use the less than option for the date, but I think that you would have to change the format and list the year first 20150619?
and make the stipulation that if the date is before 20150619 then run the button for fill the IOP grid
If Then : FID | less than | 20150619
(FID for fill IOP Grid) | RBC

I'm not sure how this would work because you would almost have to change all of the dates in order for the button to work.

I don't have a list of the Type abbreviations and their meaning - I've been meaning to compile them but haven't had time :/

[drdanny]

That right there is super clever. Besides not being too sure how we'd change the date format in all our old exams, they're not really -typed- into the old charts anywhere anyway. Somehow the IOP Graph is able to reference chart dates to fill in a Date column, so they must be pulling from -somewhere-

As it stands right now, we use a "Fill Old" button to link to the old fields from before Crystal, we manually delete any 'garbage' data filled in with the newer chart fields, then hit a "Refresh New" for every subsequent exam since it only links to new relevant fields not double-dipped by the old exams. In the end, a single button would certainly be more eloquent, but what we've got isn't so troublesome a system.

And thanks for speaking to my other question! I just reposted it elsewhere today not remembering that I'd tacked it on here.