[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In running all sorts of sorting programs and problems this process seems to
> work. Just enough information to provide variability, not too much to become
> unweildy. I think this will work. Duplicate numbers will be nearly
> impossible,
> especially with a relatively closed population of say 100,000 to 200,000.
> With millions I'm not 100% sure, but I think it likely will hold true and be
> a stable
> Unique Patient Identifier coding system. That won't be too hard to use.
This seems pretty sturdy. The only change I would recommend is to
establish/use ethnicity codes like:
http://www.unm.edu/~oir/dware/ethnic.htm Also, I would fill voids
with an underscore '_', instead of a 'Z'.
This will give you the ability to do better population studies if
ever you desire. Just run all three digits together (without the
period). I'm sure that in populations of 100's of millions there
will be a duplicate.
So now we have the FUPI (Falkoff Unique Patient Identifier)
system (don't use the 's' as part of the acronym. :-)
--
Tim Cook, President - FreePM,Inc.
http://www.FreePM.com Office: (731) 884-4126
ONLINE DEMO: http://www.freepm.org:8080/FreePM
