# GSOC Project Proposal - HIV Distribution based on WHO Definitions **URL:** \ **Category:** Development\ **Created:** [December 18, 2019, 7:59am UTC](https://talk.openmrs.org/t/gsoc-project-proposal-hiv-distribution-based-on-who-definitions/26018 "2019-12-18T07:59:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![ssmusoke](https://talk.openmrs.org/user_avatar/talk.openmrs.org/ssmusoke/32/8020_2.png) [@ssmusoke](https://talk.openmrs.org/u/ssmusoke)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2019, 7:59am UTC](https://talk.openmrs.org/t/gsoc-project-proposal-hiv-distribution-based-on-who-definitions/26018/1 "2019-12-18T07:59:56Z")
Continuing the discussion from [HIV Core Module](https://talk.openmrs.org/t/hiv-core-module/14671): As a follow-up from the OpenMRS conference in Maputo, I would like to propose an an additional distribution built on top of the Reference Application with a well defined use case to illustrate the possibilities and help drive implementations 80% of which are HIV anyway Being dogmatic, this module would be metadata only with the rest of the features being implemented downstream. So would have 1. Patient Registration Workflows - address, relationships, an HIV Care identifier, Clinican facing dashboard with attachments 2. HIV Care Enrolment 3. HIV Care Follow-up visits - with prescription and drug dispensing - lab workflows - serum crag, viral load - regimen switching & drug substitution 1. Reporting - WHO, UNAIDS, PEPFAR indicators (finer age disaggregations) - facility level reports: due for appointment, due for VL, overdue for VL - Automated submission to DHIS2 instance (there are modules & a JSON approach from UgandaEMR) 1. Transfers to other facilities and incoming transfers 2. Data Validation rules (of course ;-)) 3. Patient flags - based on WHO specifications 4. Point of care - this can be an addition on top of the forms 5. Additional wild ideas (which may not happen now): - FHIR based backend - Single SPA front end I have also checked within the GSoC program and its possible to have more than one student work on independent pieces of this module as long as each part has a dedicated mentor ---
**Author:** ![dkayiwa](https://talk.openmrs.org/user_avatar/talk.openmrs.org/dkayiwa/32/179_2.png) [@dkayiwa](https://talk.openmrs.org/u/dkayiwa)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2019, 11:10am UTC](https://talk.openmrs.org/t/gsoc-project-proposal-hiv-distribution-based-on-who-definitions/26018/2 "2019-12-18T11:10:32Z")
Is UgandaEMR planning to switch to this distribution? ---
**Author:** ![ssmusoke](https://talk.openmrs.org/user_avatar/talk.openmrs.org/ssmusoke/32/8020_2.png) [@ssmusoke](https://talk.openmrs.org/u/ssmusoke)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2019, 11:26am UTC](https://talk.openmrs.org/t/gsoc-project-proposal-hiv-distribution-based-on-who-definitions/26018/3 "2019-12-18T11:26:45Z")
@dkayiwa not switch however we can leverage alot of the work done to make this distribution… Would also provide a great stepping stone for identifying and finding future funding ---
**Author:** ![abraham1973](https://talk.openmrs.org/letter_avatar/abraham1973/32/6_22734026db12803ebb3e059622ac3534.png) [@abraham1973](https://talk.openmrs.org/u/abraham1973)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2019, 5:22am UTC](https://talk.openmrs.org/t/gsoc-project-proposal-hiv-distribution-based-on-who-definitions/26018/4 "2019-12-20T05:22:10Z")
I want to support **Mr. Stephen** proposal, this will improve the features in OpenMRS couple with proposed decouplement of FHIR within OpenMRS, this will improve the flexibility of OpenMRS forms to the end users. I will also want to see an improve functionality of Point of Care (POC) to be part of downloadable OpenMRS. ---
**Author:** ![morrisng](https://talk.openmrs.org/user_avatar/talk.openmrs.org/morrisng/32/12190_2.png) [@morrisng](https://talk.openmrs.org/u/morrisng)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2019, 11:30am UTC](https://talk.openmrs.org/t/gsoc-project-proposal-hiv-distribution-based-on-who-definitions/26018/5 "2019-12-21T11:30:09Z")
This looks like severally module been integrated together. I want to be part of this…but I also want us to analyse it carefully and weigh its pros and cons ---
**Author:** ![ibacher](https://talk.openmrs.org/user_avatar/talk.openmrs.org/ibacher/32/19751_2.png) [@ibacher](https://talk.openmrs.org/u/ibacher)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2019, 9:35pm UTC](https://talk.openmrs.org/t/gsoc-project-proposal-hiv-distribution-based-on-who-definitions/26018/6 "2019-12-21T21:35:19Z")
@ssmusoke If the FHIR backend piece becomes a reality, please reach out to me or the FHIR squad. We’d be more than happy to help with this. ---
**Author:** ![jdick](https://talk.openmrs.org/letter_avatar/jdick/32/6_22734026db12803ebb3e059622ac3534.png) [@jdick](https://talk.openmrs.org/u/jdick)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2020, 9:36am UTC](https://talk.openmrs.org/t/gsoc-project-proposal-hiv-distribution-based-on-who-definitions/26018/7 "2020-01-02T09:36:25Z")
@ssmusoke, this is our (AMPATH) number one priority for the next 6 months. We are actively working with @aojwang and the Palladium team on producing a microfrontended HIV set of features. We would be very excited work on this with you collaboratively. @gschmidt has been working on initial designs and is looking to develop a collective process to build out the various features that each implementation will need. I believe the team at PIH (@mseaton @mogoodrich) is also interested in building out an HIV specific set of features. Thanks, JJ ---
**Author:** ![akanter](https://talk.openmrs.org/user_avatar/talk.openmrs.org/akanter/32/331_2.png) [@akanter](https://talk.openmrs.org/u/akanter)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2020, 12:47am UTC](https://talk.openmrs.org/t/gsoc-project-proposal-hiv-distribution-based-on-who-definitions/26018/8 "2020-01-04T00:47:40Z")
And what ever concepts are necessary, including the roll-ups to the PEPFAR indicators should come from CIEL :). ---
**Author:** ![ssmusoke](https://talk.openmrs.org/user_avatar/talk.openmrs.org/ssmusoke/32/8020_2.png) [@ssmusoke](https://talk.openmrs.org/u/ssmusoke)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2020, 9:21am UTC](https://talk.openmrs.org/t/gsoc-project-proposal-hiv-distribution-based-on-who-definitions/26018/9 "2020-01-04T09:21:13Z")
@akanter you can be very sure that all definitions will need to be from CIEL as this is aimed at being a standardised distribution alongside RefApp ---
**Author:** ![akanter](https://talk.openmrs.org/user_avatar/talk.openmrs.org/akanter/32/331_2.png) [@akanter](https://talk.openmrs.org/u/akanter)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2020, 11:41am UTC](https://talk.openmrs.org/t/gsoc-project-proposal-hiv-distribution-based-on-who-definitions/26018/10 "2020-01-04T11:41:02Z")
Yes. I was just voicing my CIEL support for the effort! Andrew S. Kanter ---
**Author:** ![eddiemu](https://talk.openmrs.org/letter_avatar/eddiemu/32/6_22734026db12803ebb3e059622ac3534.png) [@eddiemu](https://talk.openmrs.org/u/eddiemu)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2020, 3:11pm UTC](https://talk.openmrs.org/t/gsoc-project-proposal-hiv-distribution-based-on-who-definitions/26018/11 "2020-01-06T15:11:44Z")
@ssmusoke, great suggestion. I would add that making the modules as configurable as possible should be considered, more so because we have cases where a country’s MOH policy on something may differ with PEPFAR. While most MOH’s will go with WHO standard, PEPFAR may have variations that occasionally cause a conflict that impact reporting and patient management (many implementing partners typically prioritize their reporting to the funder). A case in point, PEPFAR modified the Lost To Follow Up cut-off to 30 days while the MOH in Kenya uses 90 days. In such a case, we would want the cut off days for LTFU to be configurable to accommodate such variations. ---
**Author:** ![ssmusoke](https://talk.openmrs.org/user_avatar/talk.openmrs.org/ssmusoke/32/8020_2.png) [@ssmusoke](https://talk.openmrs.org/u/ssmusoke)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2020, 5:09pm UTC](https://talk.openmrs.org/t/gsoc-project-proposal-hiv-distribution-based-on-who-definitions/26018/12 "2020-01-06T17:09:52Z")
@eddiemu The idea is to make the module as configurable as possible, but there is also a constraint of time and capacity within GSoC I believe that we shall get there over time - due to the nature of the community ---
**Author:** ![swilmore](https://talk.openmrs.org/user_avatar/talk.openmrs.org/swilmore/32/11033_2.png) [@swilmore](https://talk.openmrs.org/u/swilmore)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2020, 5:57pm UTC](https://talk.openmrs.org/t/gsoc-project-proposal-hiv-distribution-based-on-who-definitions/26018/13 "2020-01-07T17:57:36Z")
@ssmusoke this is a great idea to leverage the summer of code for this work and we support this effort, and agree with the idea to make the modules highly configurable ---
**Author:** ![aojwang](https://talk.openmrs.org/letter_avatar/aojwang/32/6_22734026db12803ebb3e059622ac3534.png) [@aojwang](https://talk.openmrs.org/u/aojwang)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2020, 8:01am UTC](https://talk.openmrs.org/t/gsoc-project-proposal-hiv-distribution-based-on-who-definitions/26018/14 "2020-01-16T08:01:49Z")
That will help enforce standards. Thanks for this